Matt Cassel's agent for getting that huge contract for him or The patriots for getting a 2nd round pick for a below average QB?

matthewschiefs

08-10-2010, 01:02 PM

It's still to early to tell. Last year was really just a throw away season when you look at it. Cassel did not do anything to say that he is not a good qb. Now with the coaching staff that Haley wants in place we will find out who came out ahead in that trade.

Canada

08-10-2010, 01:19 PM

Matt Cassel's agent for getting that huge contract for him or The patriots for getting a 2nd round pick for a below average QB?

Seriously? Another die hard fan!! Awesome!! :sign0087:

www.patriots.com They made a better choice, go there!!

Three7s

08-10-2010, 01:23 PM

Matt Cassel's agent for getting that huge contract for him or The patriots for getting a 2nd round pick for a below average QB?
Bad troll post is bad.

Canada

08-10-2010, 01:25 PM

:troll31:

figcrostic

08-10-2010, 06:57 PM

Seriously? Another die hard fan!! Awesome!! :sign0087:

www.patriots.com (http://www.patriots.com) They made a better choice, go there!!

I'm a die hard Chiefs fan til the day I die that being said I do not think we are getting anywhere near our monies worth with Matt Cassel.

figcrostic

08-10-2010, 06:59 PM

It's still to early to tell. Last year was really just a throw away season when you look at it. Cassel did not do anything to say that he is not a good qb. Now with the coaching staff that Haley wants in place we will find out who came out ahead in that trade.

He also didn't do anything to say he is a good QB. I think the Chiefs got too trigger happy and jumped on an unproven QB in Matt Cassel.

#58ChiefsFan

08-10-2010, 07:36 PM

Proved he can take a hit over and over and over again. I'll split the blame 50/50 on him and the line for argument sake.

I still like Matt as a qbof. With Wies here now he will be a star.

matthewschiefs

08-10-2010, 07:53 PM

He also didn't do anything to say he is a good QB. I think the Chiefs got too trigger happy and jumped on an unproven QB in Matt Cassel.

Thats why I said it's to early to tell. Your right that he didn't do anything to prove that he is the QB that is worth the money. But you have to look at the team last year and the changes that were going on. They changed to Offense right before the season started with the OC being let go right before the season started. Add to that Cassels numbers should have been at least a little better then what they were with the dropped passes that were not his fault. He was not in a spot were he could prove much. I think the fact that he didn't do anything to say he is not the qb that can become the QBOTF says alot.

matthewschiefs

08-10-2010, 07:58 PM

Proved he can take a hit over and over and over again. I'll split the blame 50/50 on him and the line for argument sake.

I still like Matt as a qbof. With Wies here now he will be a star.

I think that is going to be the biggest thing to help him. If there is one thing that Wies has proven that he can do it's put points on the board. I watched a lot of Notre Dame games the last few seasons. I think he made Jimmy Clausin a star. Hopefuly he does the same thing with Matt. :chiefs:

figcrostic

08-10-2010, 08:10 PM

Proved he can take a hit over and over and over again. I'll split the blame 50/50 on him and the line for argument sake.

I still like Matt as a qbof. With Wies here now he will be a star.

Great he can take a hit put him at TE then because he can't throw accurately and has a weak arm.

#58ChiefsFan

08-10-2010, 08:35 PM

Great he can take a hit put him at TE then because he can't throw accurately and has a weak arm.

On the interviews yesterday Charlie said something along the lines of too many people worry about what they don't have rather than focusing on what they do have the best they can be.

I promise you that with wies calling the plays they will play a game that matt can succeed in. Succeed in this year and as he continues to develope.

Who exactly did you want the chiefs to get last year and please don't say miami's new third string qb Tyler.

Canada

08-10-2010, 08:50 PM

He also didn't do anything to say he is a good QB. I think the Chiefs got too trigger happy and jumped on an unproven QB in Matt Cassel.

Matt Cassel's agent for getting that huge contract for him or The patriots for getting a 2nd round pick for a below average QB?

Sounds to me like he has proven something to you. If you are going to call him a bust then you have to say that about pretty much every other player on the team as they lost 12 games as a team. Give the guy a chance, he won 11 games as a starter with NE. (I know, I know, much better team in NE) but why say he is below average when he has won 15 NFL games in two years? That seems pretty good to me.

Maybe its the way you posed question that makes it sound like the Chiefs are idiots and the QB sucks. If u had said, "who got the better deal in the NE trade?" that would seem like a fair question.

figcrostic

08-10-2010, 09:13 PM

On the interviews yesterday Charlie said something along the lines of too many people worry about what they don't have rather than focusing on what they do have the best they can be.

I promise you that with wies calling the plays they will play a game that matt can succeed in. Succeed in this year and as he continues to develope.

Who exactly did you want the chiefs to get last year and please don't say miami's new third string qb Tyler.

I respect Weis but I also feel sorry for him he's got a lot of work. Let me ask you question aside from being able to take a hit and having heart wich I respect Matt Cassel for (but that alone does not win games) what is Matt Cassel good at? I mean does he possess a strong arm? Is he good at reading the defense? Does have good vision? I have to honestly answer no to all these questions. Maybe Matty boy will prove me wrong, but I personally think we could have picked up a guy think even guy like Colt Mccoy who was drafted in the third round would be an instant improvement over Matty boy.

figcrostic

08-10-2010, 09:15 PM

Sounds to me like he has proven something to you. If you are going to call him a bust then you have to say that about pretty much every other player on the team as they lost 12 games as a team. Give the guy a chance, he won 11 games as a starter with NE. (I know, I know, much better team in NE) but why say he is below average when he has won 15 NFL games in two years? That seems pretty good to me.

Maybe its the way you posed question that makes it sound like the Chiefs are idiots and the QB sucks. If u had said, "who got the better deal in the NE trade?" that would seem like a fair question.

Dear sir, Matt has proven he can look good on a great team. I think he's a good back up but a average at best but most likely below average starter.

Three7s

08-10-2010, 09:56 PM

Dear sir, Matt has proven he can look good on a great team. I think he's a good back up but a average at best but most likely below average starter.
Time to start the "Put in Brodie!" campaign up again!

#58ChiefsFan

08-10-2010, 10:25 PM

I respect Weis but I also feel sorry for him he's got a lot of work. Let me ask you question aside from being able to take a hit and having heart wich I respect Matt Cassel for (but that alone does not win games) what is Matt Cassel good at? I mean does he possess a strong arm? Is he good at reading the defense? Does have good vision? I have to honestly answer no to all these questions. Maybe Matty boy will prove me wrong, but I personally think we could have picked up a guy think even guy like Colt Mccoy who was drafted in the third round would be an instant improvement over Matty boy.

Cassel is a blue collar work ethic guy and that will win games.

To me personally I'd answer he is a work in progress rather than no to those questions. Firing the oc and basically trashing the fifty or so practices matt had done since he got to kc right before the season really put him in one hell of a hole. I saw improvement last year where many did not in those areas, he had flashes of brilliance and flashes of stupidity both. I agree the pats made him look better than he was, however I get what pioli and co are saying about picking up a guy that is from a similar system to what they are building in kc.

In reading defenses I doubt he will ever be the caliber of say manning but I think he took a lot of hits trying to let a play develope that honestly the entire offense was slow on last year.

Accuracy well I'd split that 33/33/34 -Cassel, the seven starting wide outs we had last year dropping balls and our first year hc/oc.

I think cassel can throw the ball far enough to have a deep threat in bowe, once we get a running game teams respect.

Colt has all the tools to be a great qb I think, to me at the qb position I would rather have a guy with 11 games at NFL speed under his belt. Matt is just now a third year starter, Charlie saying he is seeing improvement accross the board at qb is a great sign.

I think this is a make or break year for matt. If wies had not come in he would probably be out after this year. I still believe he will have more games like the four wins we put together last year than everyone thinks he will.

Connie Jo

08-10-2010, 11:39 PM

I don't believe it's fair, reasonable, nor logical, to judge Cassell as being a good, poor, or even possibly a great QB...based upon last seasons stats. There are by far too many negative factors that were out of Cassell's control.

1) Firing of the OC right before the season
2) With the firing of the OC, the playbook Matt had familiarized himself with was thrown out, had to start from scratch & be ready in a couple weeks I think it was?
3) Drama in the locker room & among the team, with the LJ fiasco. Drama, bad publicity...affects a team as a whole, as well as individual players...Cassell being no exception. These guys are human first, professional atheletes second. They have emotions, worries, stress, just like the rest of us do...when there's a problem among the team due to a locker room drama/cancer.
4) LJ's being let go, the #1 RB's game Cassell was most familiar with...having to readjust to Charles. The offense is affected negatively in most cases, when a key player is lost.
5) Dwayne Bowes suspension...another 'change' Cassell had to adapt to unexpected. Chris Chambers being brought in, Cassell having to learn yet another new players game, timing, etc..
6) Poor offensive line protection, being hit time & time again, etc..
7) QB of a team with one of, if not...the highest number of dropped balls & missing catchable balls.
8) First year with a new team
9) First year with new coaches & GM
10) Under constant negative criticism publicly, including being booed & heckled by Chiefs fans in attendance at games.

Am I forgetting any other obstacles?...as if the above wasn't enough, haha. Oh yeah...I 'think' he became a daddy for the first time last season too, didn't he?

Holy QB pressure nightmare Batman!...considering all of the obstacles he faced last season...Cassell did exceptionally well, and managed to do so without being injured. I have to wonder what even Joe Montana's stats would be under all those negative factors. As well, speaking of Joe Montana...he didn't reveal greatness until his 5th year as a Veteran. A QB can only be as good as the team, coaches, and environment surrounding him is.

Matt Cassell was one of the few, if not the only Chief who dedicated himself to work daily on improving his game and team during the off season. He took no time off.

Pro_Angler

08-10-2010, 11:55 PM

i have to interject... everyone here knows that since day one I have been skeptic of cassell. I made a descision after hearing about getting a new OC and some weapons that I would shut my mouth about my thoughts on Cassell.. This off season this guy has done everything right and in camp he has been almost perfect.
I feel like this guy even given the things since last season that has happened should as a Chiefs fan just sit back relax and let the &%&% up a bit. There are a great deal of things to get excited about and some things to worry about like our d and o lines with in my own opinion CAssell is one of our least worries..

Besides I always have my Brodie chomping at the bit and healthy...lol

KCINNYC

08-11-2010, 12:00 AM

WHY DO I BOTHER READING YOUR THREADS. LAME LAME LAME.

If we won the superbowl, figrostic would complain its not by enough points.

Ryfo18

08-11-2010, 01:21 AM

Trick question. Neither. Because Cassel will prove this year he's worth the money, and the trade was a win on our part. The bonus is that I won't have to listen to your whiny posts again. Why not bring thigpen back right? He's proven to be nothing more than a 2nd-3rd stringer. Here's a little blurb from my Chiefs fantasy football outlook. I acknowledge Cassel xant throw the ball downfield, but nevertheless, he's a great QB for Weis:

"Cassel is just like Aaron Rodgers. Well, only in that that he holds onto the ball entirely too long. *It didn't affect his numbers much in New England, as he was a top 10 QB in yards per game, TD passes, and 11th in yards per attempt. *Cassel's transition to the Chiefs has been a different story though, as he failed to crack the top 20 in any of the aforementioned categories and was the third worst in yards per attempt—only better than Brady Quinn and JaMarcus Russell. *A lot of this can be attributed to the Chiefs leading the league in dropped passes with 48 (a number that Head Coach Todd Haley called “generous”). *This was 9 more drops than the next closest team. *However, Cassel still struggles to throw the ball accurately down the field (hey, it's hard to do when you get no protection).

What's changed?
*
The Chiefs line showed a significant improvement in the latter half of 2009. *After giving up 27 sacks in the first 8 games, they cut that number down to 18 in the next 8 games. *Left tackle Branden Albert did not give up a sack in the last 4 games after struggling mightily at the beginning of the season. *The Chiefs also brought in some offensive line help in the offseason. *Veteran Center Casey Wiegmann isn't much of an upgrade over the team's 2009 offensive line MVP, Rudy Niswanger. *Ryan Lilja, who served as Peyton Manning's Right Guard since 2004, figures to provide Cassel some more protection from the position. *The Chiefs also drafted Guard Jon Asamoah in the 3rd rounnd. *He will provide some much needed depth for the line.

Perhaps more important than the offensive line improvements, the Chiefs brought in a decorated Offensive Coordinator in Charlie Weis. *Weis served as the catalyst to Tom Brady's career in New England, while also helping them to win 3 super bowls in 4 years as their Offensive Coordinator. *There is no doubt that Weis has a knack for getting the most out of his quarterbacks, and while Brady serves as a prime example of this, Weis also developed Brady Quinn and Jimmy Clausen into elite college quarterbacks. *
*
Looking back into Weis's playcalling days in New England, he didn't really have any elite WRs on his teams. *Names like Troy Brown, David Patten, Deion Branch, Daniel Graham, and David Givens certainly don't stand out. *Other than Troy Brown's 1199 yards in 2001, no other receiver went for over 1000 yards during Weis's tenure. *Cassel definitely has some offensive weapons in Chris Chambers and Dwayne Bowe. *Newly acquired 2nd round burner Dexter McCluster will be operating in Weis's all important slot position, a position that nobody could consistently produce at for the Chiefs in 2009. *Cassel also has an elusive back in Jamaal Charles to check-down to out of the backfield. *There is no reason to think he won't show a drastic improvement over last year's disappointing season. *Given his current ADP of 13.08, Cassel is a QB2 worth taking. *The pieces are in place for him to have QB1 upside. *For those of you that like to wait until later in the draft and play matchups with your QBs, Cassel could certainly be a nice piece to add, as he boasts one of the easier schedules in the NFL this year."

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 09:35 AM

WHY DO I BOTHER READING YOUR THREADS. LAME LAME LAME.

If we won the superbowl, figrostic would complain its not by enough points.

If Matt played a consistent season and only had 16 td's 8 int and only 3000 yards with a 61% or better completion rate I will quit *****ing these numbers would make him an average QB. With how much we pay the guy he should be having close to 4K yards a season with a 65% completion rate 25td's and 15int or less this would put him around top ten. But what are you going to do sir if the season ends and Matt has 2600 yards 15 td's 15 int and a 57% completion rate. You guys will do what you always do ***** about the line, ***** about the receivers, or ***** about the coaching. I HOPE I AM WRONG I AM A BIG CHIEFS FAN

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 09:43 AM

Cassel is a blue collar work ethic guy and that will win games.

To me personally I'd answer he is a work in progress rather than no to those questions. Firing the oc and basically trashing the fifty or so practices matt had done since he got to kc right before the season really put him in one hell of a hole. I saw improvement last year where many did not in those areas, he had flashes of brilliance and flashes of stupidity both. I agree the pats made him look better than he was, however I get what pioli and co are saying about picking up a guy that is from a similar system to what they are building in kc.

In reading defenses I doubt he will ever be the caliber of say manning but I think he took a lot of hits trying to let a play develope that honestly the entire offense was slow on last year.

Accuracy well I'd split that 33/33/34 -Cassel, the seven starting wide outs we had last year dropping balls and our first year hc/oc.

I think cassel can throw the ball far enough to have a deep threat in bowe, once we get a running game teams respect.

Colt has all the tools to be a great qb I think, to me at the qb position I would rather have a guy with 11 games at NFL speed under his belt. Matt is just now a third year starter, Charlie saying he is seeing improvement accross the board at qb is a great sign.

I think this is a make or break year for matt. If wies had not come in he would probably be out after this year. I still believe he will have more games like the four wins we put together last year than everyone thinks he will.

I respect your opinion and I'm glad you didn't put something ignorant like everyone else just accusing me of being a hater. I know Charlie Weis is seeing improvement, but really what is he supposed to say? These guys suck I shouldn't have taken this job because they will make me look bad. I think you and I are both in agreement that Matt Cassel is an average guy QB. I know everyone on here is telling me to shut up because Matt is our QB but I am tired of accepting mediocrity from my team that I love so much. I believe if Matt Cassel becomes our permanent guy that we will be a running team I don't see Matt winning games based on his arm I see him as a poor man's Huard I say poor man's because Huard was more accurate.

Pro_Angler

08-11-2010, 11:07 AM

dude your now a idiot!!! go find another team to not suport!!

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 11:12 AM

Matt Cassel is the type of QB who will play to his talent level. He isn't an elite guy like Manning, Brees, or Brady - a guy who will will a team to 10 wins no matter how good his supporting cast is. But he won't sabotage a good team - 2009 shows that.

If Cassel has a great OL and great WRs, he'll be fine. If he doesn't, he won't. If you like our OL and WRs, then you should feel good about his chances for a breakout 2010 and the Chiefs 2010 season. If you think our OL is a bottom three squad and our WRs aren't appreciably better than last year's bunch, then you should resign yourself to another 4-12 year.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 11:26 AM

dude your now a idiot!!! go find another team to not suport!!

And your somehow more intelligent than I am because you can throw out random insults to strangers on the internet, and misspell the word "support"? I don't know you, and you don't know me. If you wanna have a rational discussion, your more then welcome, but if you wanna act like a lil coward who says insulting things over the internet that you would never say in person, because you would get punched in the face for then go to another thread.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 11:30 AM

Matt Cassel is the type of QB who will play to his talent level. He isn't an elite guy like Manning, Brees, or Brady - a guy who will will a team to 10 wins no matter how good his supporting cast is. But he won't sabotage a good team - 2009 shows that.

If Cassel has a great OL and great WRs, he'll be fine. If he doesn't, he won't. If you like our OL and WRs, then you should feel good about his chances for a breakout 2010 and the Chiefs 2010 season. If you think our OL is a bottom three squad and our WRs aren't appreciably better than last year's bunch, then you should resign yourself to another 4-12 year.

I think our OL is mediocore I think our Wr's our average, but I think our running game is top 5. Honestly I don't ever think we had a great WR core but we used to have a sick passing game because Trent Green was a great qb. Your right Cassel will not make our WR's great. Why would you want a QB like that. If we paid Cassel 2 million or less a year and picked him up as free agent so be it, and I know it's not my money, but when he is being paid like a Tom Brady I expect him to be top ten.

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 11:44 AM

And your somehow more intelligent than I am because you can throw out random insults to strangers on the internet, and misspell the word "support"? I don't know you, and you don't know me. If you wanna have a rational discussion, your more then welcome, but if you wanna act like a lil coward who says insulting things over the internet that you would never say in person, because you would get punched in the face for then go to another thread.
I'll say it in person......

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 11:48 AM

I'll say it in person......

You will say what in person? And how old are you exactly sir?

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 11:51 AM

Dear sir, Matt has proven he can look good on a great team. I think he's a good back up but a average at best but most likely below average starter.
Don't most QB's fall into the "can look great on a great team" catagory? You don't throw for 3700 yds, 21 TD's, 11 INT's while getting sacked 45 times because you suck and the rest of the team carried you. Maybe you should say he is unproven as a Chief. He has proven he can put up numbers. Do you honestly think whoever you deem to be the best QB in the league would have put up stellar, Pro Bowl numbers on this team last season?

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 11:53 AM

I think our OL is mediocore I think our Wr's our average, but I think our running game is top 5. Honestly I don't ever think we had a great WR core but we used to have a sick passing game because Trent Green was a great qb. Your right Cassel will not make our WR's great. Why would you want a QB like that. If we paid Cassel 2 million or less a year and picked him up as free agent so be it, and I know it's not my money, but when he is being paid like a Tom Brady I expect him to be top ten.

Trent Green is the perfect example of how a great OL can make an average or above-average QB look great. Nothing against Trent, who was awesome while a Chief, but Roaf, Shields, and the rest made Damon Huard look like a superstar when he started in 2006. Again, if you like our OL, you should like Cassel's chances. If you don't, you shouldn't.

I'd care more about the money if (1) we weren't massively under the salary cap in 2009, and (2) we don't seem to be interested in spending in the no-cap 2010. And Cassel is a better QB than we could have drafted at the top of the 2nd. Trading for him was a good move. If he stinks it up in 2010, we'll just cut him and draft a QBOTF in 2011, no harm done.

And our running game is good. But it isn't top-5 (Tennessee, Carolina, Miami, Baltimore, Dallas, and New Orleans are unquestionably better), and it won't matter anyway if we're always playing behind because our defense can't stop anyone.

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 11:54 AM

You will say what in person? And how old are you exactly sir?
Whatever you would like to hear and I'm old enough to take care of business! Don't come on hear calling people cowards and threatening to punch people in the face unless your ready to accept and *ss beating yourself. I'm in Scottsdale, Az. Next time your here, look me up. We'll get aquainted very quickly!

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 11:57 AM

Don't most QB's fall into the "can look great on a great team" catagory? You don't throw for 3700 yds, 21 TD's, 11 INT's while getting sacked 45 times because you suck and the rest of the team carried you. Maybe you should say he is unproven as a Chief. He has proven he can put up numbers. Do you honestly think whoever you deem to be the best QB in the league would have put up stellar, Pro Bowl numbers on this team last season?

All you proved is that Matt holds onto the ball way too long on the same team Tom Brady was sacked half that amount. I think Tyler Thigpen would have looked good on the Patriots and while I liked Tyler for his heart and grit I don't want him to be my starting QB.

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 11:59 AM

Don't most QB's fall into the "can look great on a great team" catagory? You don't throw for 3700 yds, 21 TD's, 11 INT's while getting sacked 45 times because you suck and the rest of the team carried you. Maybe you should say he is unproven as a Chief. He has proven he can put up numbers. Do you honestly think whoever you deem to be the best QB in the league would have put up stellar, Pro Bowl numbers on this team last season?

Not to get in the middle, but our team this year is basically the same as it was last year. We're still starting the exact same offensive personnel to a man, except we added Lilja or Asamoah at RG, Jones at RB instead of LJ, an a new scatback in McCluster. Do you think that's enough to help Cassel be better than last year? Because I have my doubts.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 12:04 PM

Whatever you would like to hear and I'm old enough to take care of business! Don't come on hear calling people cowards and threatening to punch people in the face unless your ready to accept and *ss beating yourself. I'm in Scottsdale, Az. Next time your here, look me up. We'll get aquainted very quickly!

I never threatened anyone, I was insulted and I said to the poster that he would not say to someones face, because he would not like the consequences. I don't go to Scottsdale, and I don't claim to be a tough guy, but I know how to fight. I will send you the same invitation next time your in Kansas City come to the MMA gym I train at and we can legally throw down, but I think you are like most people with a big mouth and would probably look at the ground while talking to me and say "Hey man I was just messing." It's a stupid to threaten someone over the internet you have never seen me and don't know if I can fight or not or how big I am.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 12:05 PM

Not to get in the middle, but our team this year is basically the same as it was last year. We're still starting the exact same offensive personnel to a man, except we added Lilja or Asamoah at RG, Jones at RB instead of LJ, an a new scatback in McCluster. Do you think that's enough to help Cassel be better than last year? Because I have my doubts.

Here come the excuses.

OPLookn

08-11-2010, 12:12 PM

Ok, I've gotten tired of the Matt Cassell isn't good enough diatribe and yes I was frustrated and called for his head a few times last year as well. But looking at these stats I'm willing to give the guy not only this season but a few more years.

Here is a list of QB's and their first 6 seasons, below is a list of who they were... Some seasons had strikes and some were from a lil bit back in the day kind of thing. But here you go...

Ok, I've gotten tired of the Matt Cassell isn't good enough diatribe and yes I was frustrated and called for his head a few times last year as well. But looking at these stats I'm willing to give the guy not only this season but a few more years.

Here is a list of QB's and their first 6 seasons, below is a list of who they were... Some seasons had strikes and some were from a lil bit back in the day kind of thing. But here you go...

Well, the obvious difference is that Marino, Manning, Montana, and Dawson's first years were when they were 21-22 years old. Cassel was 26 in 2008, and he will be 28 this year. This is supposed to be his prime.

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 12:35 PM

Here come the excuses.

Excuses? We have the 2nd worst OT tandem in the NFL. Our best O-lineman is a declining 33-year-old LG. We don't have another offensive lineman whose in the top-30 at his position. We don't have a top-15 WR on the roster.

Our entire offseason haul for the offense was a rookie scatback/slot WR with fumbling problems, an old undersized C, an undersized injury-prone RG, a rookie injury-prone TE, a promising rookie RG, and a good RB on his last legs.

It isn't as if we brought in a bunch of help for Cassel. No QB not named Petyon, Drew, or Tom could have succeeded her last year. Or maybe this year.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 12:36 PM

Ok, I've gotten tired of the Matt Cassell isn't good enough diatribe and yes I was frustrated and called for his head a few times last year as well. But looking at these stats I'm willing to give the guy not only this season but a few more years.

Here is a list of QB's and their first 6 seasons, below is a list of who they were... Some seasons had strikes and some were from a lil bit back in the day kind of thing. But here you go...

I appreciate that you took the time to include stats and number, but first off Peyton Manning was a first year starter and was only 22 years old, Joe Montana was a first year starter and only 23, Dan Mario was 22, Len Dawson only played 7 games the first year you listed and on top of that Len never had good numbers he had awful numbers in fact. Matt Cassell has been in the league 5 years is 28 years old and did not get better like Marino, Peyton, and Montana where they instantly improved. Cassell got worse. Granted he played on a crappier team, but let's be honest Cassell will never be a Peyton and I'm fine with that Peyton is one in a million. Matt Cassell at his absolute best is a game manager and that's not worth his paycheck. If we picked up Matt for 2.5 million in the free agency, had a best of an O-line and killer running game and had Matt throw 10-15 times a game and just tell him to be safe then he would suffice. The anger I have is when we picked him up we had a horrible line, now it's mediocre, we had no running now we have two solid back, and we just have average WR's Matt is not going to win games for us and he was brought in to win games. If I was Matt I would give Jamaal half my paycheck because that's who won those games for us last year oh and Ryan Succup Love that guy.

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 12:36 PM

I never threatened anyone, I was insulted and I said to the poster that he would not say to someones face, because he would not like the consequences. I don't go to Scottsdale, and I don't claim to be a tough guy, but I know how to fight. I will send you the same invitation next time your in Kansas City come to the MMA gym I train at and we can legally throw down, but I think you are like most people with a big mouth and would probably look at the ground while talking to me and say "Hey man I was just messing." It's a stupid to threaten someone over the internet you have never seen me and don't know if I can fight or not or how big I am.
Look bud, you called the guy a coward! I'm extremely confindent in my abilities to deal with punks like you. Don't need to know ya, don't need to see ya. If we ever do meet, you will find out I am not like most guys. MMA training? Your not serious are you? What a joke! However I have done what I said I would not do so I am done with this part of the discussion no matter how long you continue it.

To say Cassel is unproven is simply wrong! He took a team in the NFL to the playoffs. Period. I'm not sure anyone was overly impressed with what he did here last season but it's very difficult to say a guy is not a starter when he play's on a team as bad as this one was last year. If he has another year like that, than ya maybe there should be some concerns. There's no way in hell that Thigpen or Croyle produces what he did in NE because they are both injury prone. Proven fact!

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 12:38 PM

I appreciate that you took the time to include stats and number, but first off Peyton Manning was a first year starter and was only 22 years old, Joe Montana was a first year starter and only 23, Dan Mario was 22, Len Dawson only played 7 games the first year you listed and on top of that Len never had good numbers he had awful numbers in fact. Matt Cassell has been in the league 5 years is 28 years old and did not get better like Marino, Peyton, and Montana where they instantly improved. Cassell got worse. Granted he played on a crappier team, but let's be honest Cassell will never be a Peyton and I'm fine with that Peyton is one in a million. Matt Cassell at his absolute best is a game manager and that's not worth his paycheck. If we picked up Matt for 2.5 million in the free agency, had a best of an O-line and killer running game and had Matt throw 10-15 times a game and just tell him to be safe then he would suffice. The anger I have is when we picked him up we had a horrible line, now it's mediocre, we had no running now we have two solid back, and we just have average WR's Matt is not going to win games for us and he was brought in to win games. If I was Matt I would give Jamaal half my paycheck because that's who won those games for us last year oh and Ryan Succup Love that guy.

Again, why do you care how much Cassel is paid? How does it affect anything? We weren't willing to spend the cap limit even when there was a salary cap, and there's no salary cap now.

This just seems like causeless whining.

OPLookn

08-11-2010, 12:44 PM

Well, the obvious difference is that Marino, Manning, Montana, and Dawson's first years were when they were 21-22 years old. Cassel was 26 in 2008, and he will be 28 this year. This is supposed to be his prime.

Age isn't an indicator of how good they should be. Age is more an indicator of reaction time and speed as we all know the older you get the slower you'll get. I'll take someone with 5 or 6 years of experience over someone who's a certain age and supposed to be in their prime....

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 12:47 PM

Excuses? We have the 2nd worst OT tandem in the NFL. Our best O-lineman is a declining 33-year-old LG. We don't have another offensive lineman whose in the top-30 at his position. We don't have a top-15 WR on the roster.

Our entire offseason haul for the offense was a rookie scatback/slot WR with fumbling problems, an old undersized C, an undersized injury-prone RG, a rookie injury-prone TE, a promising rookie RG, and a good RB on his last legs.

It isn't as if we brought in a bunch of help for Cassel. No QB not named Petyon, Drew, or Tom could have succeeded her last year. Or maybe this year.

Sir I agree with you. The thing is I have been talking about getting a better line defensively and offensively instead we got a bunch of DB's in the draft, but of course of Im stupid and Berry is going to single handily stop the run but lets not even get into that. I know our OL is not good but guess what Pioli did as well when he decided to drop that huge contract on Cassel instead of beefing up the line. If you wanted a QB that would struggle why not just keep Thigpen at least he was cheap, and the when the line is good try and get a A+ QB instead of a C - in Matt Cassell.

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 12:48 PM

I appreciate that you took the time to include stats and number, but first off Peyton Manning was a first year starter and was only 22 years old, Joe Montana was a first year starter and only 23, Dan Mario was 22, Len Dawson only played 7 games the first year you listed and on top of that Len never had good numbers he had awful numbers in fact. Matt Cassell has been in the league 5 years is 28 years old and did not get better like Marino, Peyton, and Montana where they instantly improved. Cassell got worse. Granted he played on a crappier team, but let's be honest Cassell will never be a Peyton and I'm fine with that Peyton is one in a million. Matt Cassell at his absolute best is a game manager and that's not worth his paycheck. If we picked up Matt for 2.5 million in the free agency, had a best of an O-line and killer running game and had Matt throw 10-15 times a game and just tell him to be safe then he would suffice. The anger I have is when we picked him up we had a horrible line, now it's mediocre, we had no running now we have two solid back, and we just have average WR's Matt is not going to win games for us and he was brought in to win games. If I was Matt I would give Jamaal half my paycheck because that's who won those games for us last year oh and Ryan Succup Love that guy.
Speaking of paychecks, let's bet yours that he attempted more than 10-15 per game......

matthewschiefs

08-11-2010, 12:54 PM

Excuses? We have the 2nd worst OT tandem in the NFL. Our best O-lineman is a declining 33-year-old LG. We don't have another offensive lineman whose in the top-30 at his position. We don't have a top-15 WR on the roster.

Our entire offseason haul for the offense was a rookie scatback/slot WR with fumbling problems, an old undersized C, an undersized injury-prone RG, a rookie injury-prone TE, a promising rookie RG, and a good RB on his last legs.

It isn't as if we brought in a bunch of help for Cassel. No QB not named Petyon, Drew, or Tom could have succeeded her last year. Or maybe this year.

The O line got a lot better by the end of last season. Look at what Charles was able to do the last few games of last season. Ask the teams that Charles ran all over if our o line is as bad as you make it out to be. It took time for the guys we traded for right before the season to gel. So much like Cassel we are going to have to wait and see.

We did go out and get some guys and drafted an o lineman. Its far to early to talk about how bad this o line is. We just don't no yet.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 12:57 PM

Speaking of paychecks, let's bet yours that he attempted more than 10-15 per game......

Read more carefully sir I said the ideal situation would be him throwing the ball that many times. I believe he will throw more than that, but I don't think Matt is best suited to be a Tom Brady or Peyton Manning type offense.

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 01:02 PM

Sir I agree with you. The thing is I have been talking about getting a better line defensively and offensively instead we got a bunch of DB's in the draft, but of course of Im stupid and Berry is going to single handily stop the run but lets not even get into that. I know our OL is not good but guess what Pioli did as well when he decided to drop that huge contract on Cassel instead of beefing up the line. If you wanted a QB that would struggle why not just keep Thigpen at least he was cheap, and the when the line is good try and get a A+ QB instead of a C - in Matt Cassell.

Again, why do you care how much Cassel's paid? It doesn't matter even slightly whether he's paid $2M a year or $20M a year. And A+ QBs don't fall out of the sky, you know. We're taking a chance on Cassel at almost no risk. If he fails this year, we dump him and draft Andrew Luck. If he succeeds, we have a good QB. Where's the downside here?

The 2nd round pick we traded for Cassel wouldn't have fixed our DL/OL issues. If we wouldn't draft any sort of NT, ILB, or OT between the past two drafts, it's pretty safe to assume that the 2nd rounder for Cassel wouldn't have been used for such either.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 01:02 PM

The O line got a lot better by the end of last season. Look at what Charles was able to do the last few games of last season. Ask the teams that Charles ran all over if our o line is as bad as you make it out to be. It took time for the guys we traded for right before the season to gel. So much like Cassel we are going to have to wait and see.

We did go out and get some guys and drafted an o lineman. Its far to early to talk about how bad this o line is. We just don't no yet.
That might very well be true, but we also had an awesome RB instead a woman beating has been.

matthewschiefs

08-11-2010, 01:05 PM

That might very well be true, but we also had an awesome RB instead a woman beating has been.

That in part is what I am saying. Charles ran behind the same o line that the bum the is Larry Johson ran behind. And there was improvement there. So the question is how much or the early season problems were the O line and how many were on Johson. That's something that we are going to have to find out before we find out how good bad or in between the O line is.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 01:07 PM

Again, why do you care how much Cassel's paid? It doesn't matter even slightly whether he's paid $2M a year or $20M a year. And A+ QBs don't fall out of the sky, you know. We're taking a chance on Cassel at almost no risk. If he fails this year, we dump him and draft Andrew Luck. If he succeeds, we have a good QB. Where's the downside here?

The 2nd round pick we traded for Cassel wouldn't have fixed our DL/OL issues. If we wouldn't draft any sort of NT, ILB, or OT between the past two drafts, it's pretty safe to assume that the 2nd rounder for Cassel wouldn't have been used for such either.

Andrew Luck is a freshman and like Matt Cassell unproven, but that would most likely be an improvement.

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 01:09 PM

The O line got a lot better by the end of last season. Look at what Charles was able to do the last few games of last season. Ask the teams that Charles ran all over if our o line is as bad as you make it out to be. It took time for the guys we traded for right before the season to gel. So much like Cassel we are going to have to wait and see.

We did go out and get some guys and drafted an o lineman. Its far to early to talk about how bad this o line is. We just don't no yet.

Our O-line played much worse run defenses in the last six games than it did the first ten. That was the much bigger difference than heightended play by the OL. Cassel was still being heavily pressured (check out his game log) and making bad, inaccurate throws because of this.

I wish I could have your confidence about the OL, but I don't think we've done nearly anything to fix our problems except for drafting Asamoah, who probably won't be starting in 2010. If I were a cynical man, I'd say we're just cheap and unwilling to spend to put together a real OL again.

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 01:11 PM

Andrew Luck is a freshman but that would be an improvement.

Well, he was a freshman in 2009. He'll be a sophmore in 2010 and will almost certainly enter the draft in 2011.

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 01:11 PM

Read more carefully sir I said the ideal situation would be him throwing the ball that many times. I believe he will throw more than that, but I don't think Matt is best suited to be a Tom Brady or Peyton Manning type offense.
Really? You think him only throwing the ball 10-15 would suffice? FAIL!!!!

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 01:16 PM

Really? You think him only throwing the ball 10-15 would suffice? FAIL!!!!

Yeah, apparently figcrostic thinks we're going to be playing a lot of teams from the 1950s.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 01:16 PM

Look bud, you called the guy a coward! I'm extremely confindent in my abilities to deal with punks like you. Don't need to know ya, don't need to see ya. If we ever do meet, you will find out I am not like most guys. MMA training? Your not serious are you? What a joke! However I have done what I said I would not do so I am done with this part of the discussion no matter how long you continue it.

To say Cassel is unproven is simply wrong! He took a team in the NFL to the playoffs. Period. I'm not sure anyone was overly impressed with what he did here last season but it's very difficult to say a guy is not a starter when he play's on a team as bad as this one was last year. If he has another year like that, than ya maybe there should be some concerns. There's no way in hell that Thigpen or Croyle produces what he did in NE because they are both injury prone. Proven fact!

I love how 45 year old men like yourself who haven't been in a fight in 25 years think they can beat the **** out of a 26 year old man who trains with guys that are professional fighters and holds their own. Talk all the the trash you want maybe it will make you feel better, but unlike you I don't have an ego I get into a fist fight albeit in a professional setting 3 times a week i get all that aggression out in the gym. I have trained with people like you sir that come in and get winded after throwing a couple hay makers get winded and get pounded out, and I ran into your type in the marines guys that are all talk and no **** and balls.

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 01:17 PM

Just an FYI.....There was not a QB in the league that threw the ball less than 20 times a game last year. To say that is the way to have your offense run at it's optimal level, no matter how bad the QB or offense, is just lack of knowledge!

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 01:22 PM

I love how 45 year old men like yourself who haven't been in a fight in 25 years think they can beat the **** out of a 26 year old man who trains with guys that are professional fighters and holds their own. Talk all the the trash you want maybe it will make you feel better, but unlike you I don't have an ego I get into a fist fight albeit in a professional setting 3 times a week i get all that aggression out in the gym. I have trained with people like you sir that come in and get winded after throwing a couple hay makers get winded and get pounded out, and I ran into your type in the marines guys that are all talk and no **** and balls.
36, 6'1, 220. I'm guessin I'll be ok youngster. 22 years of hockey and real fight experience have prepared me well. We're good though bud. Keep training. Hope it works out for ya.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 01:28 PM

36, 6'1, 220. I'm guessin I'll be ok youngster. 22 years of hockey and real fight experience have prepared me well. We're good though bud. Keep training. Hope it works out for ya.

Great I'm 6"4 243, I'm a Iraq war veteran and have been trained by the Marines to fight and been training on my own for 10 years, but what does that prove? That I can sound tough over the internet.

matthewschiefs

08-11-2010, 01:30 PM

Our O-line played much worse run defenses in the last six games than it did the first ten. That was the much bigger difference than heightended play by the OL. Cassel was still being heavily pressured (check out his game log) and making bad, inaccurate throws because of this.

I wish I could have your confidence about the OL, but I don't think we've done nearly anything to fix our problems except for drafting Asamoah, who probably won't be starting in 2010. If I were a cynical man, I'd say we're just cheap and unwilling to spend to put together a real OL again.

Cassel was getting pressured but it's not just as simple as saying that the O Line was bad part of it was that he does tend to hold on to the ball to long. Even the best O lines can only give a QB a certain amount of time before they get to the QB. That is my biggest issue with Cassel. He has to get rid of the ball. If he does this again then we have to see how much of it was the O line was bad how much of it was Cassel holding on to the football when it's time to throw the ball away.

I can't say that I have a lot of confidence about the O line what I am saying is with the new coaching with a year now under guys belts in this offense. How much improvement will we see. That is a question that we will only be able to answer once the games start. I am giveing it a chance.

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 01:32 PM

Great I'm 6"4 243, I'm a Iraq war veteran and have been trained by the Marines to fight and been training on my own for 10 years, but what does that prove? That I can sound tough over the internet.
Thanks for your service son! However none of which mean anything to me when it comes to one on one in the parking lot bud.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 01:38 PM

Thanks for your service son! However none of which mean anything to me when it comes to one on one in the parking lot bud.

Your logic doesn't make sense sir,I think you have watched to many movies the best way to get good at something is to practice at it whether it comes to playing football or fighting. I have been in many street fights and my training has helped me go from a good fighter to a great fighter I know how to throw punch, block a punch and even take a punch, I know how to get an opponent to the ground submit an opponent, and what to do if I get taken to the ground, but of course your 20 years of Hockey trained you much better. What are you going to do that I haven't seen? You gonna try to bite me or hit me in the nuts I have fought dirty fighters. Do you think you can throw a punch harder or with better technigue then people that have been training 10 plus years 3-5 days a week no your not. You would get your *** handed to you. Like I said you can come on down put some pads on there are guys training here that weigh 150 pounds that would eat your butt alive and when you threw one of your sloppy Hockey punches they would take you down get on top of you and punch you in the face repeatedly until your either were unconscious or tapped out which you would tap out.

Connie Jo

08-11-2010, 01:38 PM

I respect your opinion and I'm glad you didn't put something ignorant like everyone else just accusing me of being a hater. I know Charlie Weis is seeing improvement, but really what is he supposed to say? These guys suck I shouldn't have taken this job because they will make me look bad. I think you and I are both in agreement that Matt Cassel is an average guy QB. I know everyone on here is telling me to shut up because Matt is our QB but I am tired of accepting mediocrity from my team that I love so much. I believe if Matt Cassel becomes our permanent guy that we will be a running team I don't see Matt winning games based on his arm I see him as a poor man's Huard I say poor man's because Huard was more accurate.

"everyone else"...I didn't call you a hater. I've read your posts enough to know you are a Chiefs fan, but with a negative outlook often is all.

I think our OL is mediocore I think our Wr's our average, but I think our running game is top 5. Honestly I don't ever think we had a great WR core but we used to have a sick passing game because Trent Green was a great qb. Your right Cassel will not make our WR's great. Why would you want a QB like that. If we paid Cassel 2 million or less a year and picked him up as free agent so be it, and I know it's not my money, but when he is being paid like a Tom Brady I expect him to be top ten.

Well, how exactly can Cassell make our WR's great when they ranked highest in the NFL last season for dropping or missing catchable balls? I refer to Montana again, how great would Montana have made Jerry Rice if he dropped & missed catchable balls? As far as that goes, how great would Montana have been if his WR's, such as Rice...dropped & missed catchable balls.

One can't be great with out the other, it's teamwork between a QB & his WR's, heck...becoming a winning football team is a team effort in all aspects, you know that. :)

Not to get in the middle, but our team this year is basically the same as it was last year. We're still starting the exact same offensive personnel to a man, except we added Lilja or Asamoah at RG, Jones at RB instead of LJ, an a new scatback in McCluster. Do you think that's enough to help Cassel be better than last year? Because I have my doubts.

Not quite the same, we have new coaches, including an OC. The team has another year of learning experience behind them, experience both as an individual player and as a team working together. Many other negative team factors aren't the same either...LJ is gone, to mention one of many.

I never threatened anyone, I was insulted and I said to the poster that he would not say to someones face, because he would not like the consequences. I don't go to Scottsdale, and I don't claim to be a tough guy, but I know how to fight. I will send you the same invitation next time your in Kansas City come to the MMA gym I train at and we can legally throw down, but I think you are like most people with a big mouth and would probably look at the ground while talking to me and say "Hey man I was just messing." It's a stupid to threaten someone over the internet you have never seen me and don't know if I can fight or not or how big I am.

I didn't read his comment as being a personal direct insult against you, rather using the word "idiot" in jest during a debate of opinion, not literally meant. I could be wrong, but think you took his 'idiot' comment more personal than he intended, which triggered your becoming defensive taking it to an elevated level.

The biggest problem with conversing/debating opinions on the internet, is the lack of body language, inability to hear tone of voice...many misunderstandings occur as a result. :)

Ok, I've gotten tired of the Matt Cassell isn't good enough diatribe and yes I was frustrated and called for his head a few times last year as well. But looking at these stats I'm willing to give the guy not only this season but a few more years.

Here is a list of QB's and their first 6 seasons, below is a list of who they were... Some seasons had strikes and some were from a lil bit back in the day kind of thing. But here you go...

Thank you! I attempted to make the same point earlier in this debate, specifically related to Montana. However, you made the point notably & statistically better, haha. :)

Well, the obvious difference is that Marino, Manning, Montana, and Dawson's first years were when they were 21-22 years old. Cassel was 26 in 2008, and he will be 28 this year. This is supposed to be his prime.

How can we rationally compare Cassell's age of 26 to that of those above 4-5 years younger, when Cassell wasn't given the same opportunity to start at a younger age that they were? How can he be in his QB prime, statistically speaking as a starter, when last season was only his 2nd year as a starter? According to OPLookn's stats...it takes a starting QB the average of 5 years to hit their prime statistically.

Hell, Cassell in his first year as a starter for NE had higher stats than all those legendary QB's noted, with exception of Marino at 96%. If that's an indication of what to expect from him in the future...the Chiefs likely could have a very legendary QB in the making. I don't consider last years stats as a factor, because there were simply too many obstacles at once against Cassell, that those legendary QB's above did not face. Likely, they never faced some of the obstacles Cassell did during their entire careers, especially all occurring within the same season! Such as, the firing of their OC right before the season began, throwing out the playbook they had praticed learning for weeks prior, having to start from scratch.

I appreciate that you took the time to include stats and number, but first off Peyton Manning was a first year starter and was only 22 years old, Joe Montana was a first year starter and only 23, Dan Mario was 22, Len Dawson only played 7 games the first year you listed and on top of that Len never had good numbers he had awful numbers in fact. Matt Cassell has been in the league 5 years is 28 years old and did not get better like Marino, Peyton, and Montana where they instantly improved. Cassell got worse. Granted he played on a crappier team, but let's be honest Cassell will never be a Peyton and I'm fine with that Peyton is one in a million. Matt Cassell at his absolute best is a game manager and that's not worth his paycheck. If we picked up Matt for 2.5 million in the free agency, had a best of an O-line and killer running game and had Matt throw 10-15 times a game and just tell him to be safe then he would suffice. The anger I have is when we picked him up we had a horrible line, now it's mediocre, we had no running now we have two solid back, and we just have average WR's Matt is not going to win games for us and he was brought in to win games. If I was Matt I would give Jamaal half my paycheck because that's who won those games for us last year oh and Ryan Succup Love that guy.

Honestly, your review of last season isn't fair, nor rational. No one player wins games single handed, realistically. Someone had to get Succop close enough to make FG's...no? Someone had to hand off efficiently and block for Jamaal...no?

As I mentioned above, last season stats should not even be a factor when judging Cassell...too many obstacles, variants, not in his control. He can't have completed passes when his receivers aren't catching catchable balls, or dropping them...correct? The majority of those dropped balls & missed catches were clearly not the fault of Cassell.

I see his NE stats as being a much more logical and fair showing of what Cassell is capable of with the right coaching & teamwork...and that was only in his first year as a starter! WOW!! :D

fairladyZ

08-11-2010, 01:45 PM

I don't understand why everyone says that Cassel has a weak arm.. I just don't see it. Does he have a cannon? no.. But he has just as strong a arm as montana, brady, ryan, sanchez, brees.

http://www.youtube.com/user/ChiefsGo81#p/u/13/3HLwai_yV4A

Connie Jo

08-11-2010, 01:47 PM

In Cassell's defense:

He became the Patriots' starting quarterback in Week 1 of the 2008 season (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_NFL_season) after then reigning NFL MVP Tom Brady (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Brady) suffered a season-ending knee injury. According to ESPN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESPN) research, he is the only known quarterback in NFL history to start an NFL game at quarterback without ever starting at quarterback in college.

In his first season as a starter, Cassel became only the fifth NFL quarterback to have passed for more than 400 yards in consecutive games (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NFL_quarterbacks_who_have_passed_for_400_o r_more_yards_in_a_game), and the first since the NFL-AFL merger (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL-AFL_merger) with 60 rushing yards in the same game.

Somebody must have seen something in Cassell:

Despite having had little chance to demonstrate his skills in actual game situations at USC, Cassel earned himself a place on several NFL teams' draft boards after working out at USC's 2005 Pro Day. One of Cassel's coaches, Norm Chow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norm_Chow), who had left USC to become the offensive coordinator for the Tennessee Titans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_Titans), had discussed signing Cassel as an undrafted free agent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undrafted_free_agent) after the 2005 NFL Draft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_NFL_Draft); Chow was surprised to learn the Patriots had drafted Cassel in the seventh round, with the 230th overall pick,[15] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Cassel#cite_note-14) ahead of more accomplished college quarterbacks such as Timmy Chang (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timmy_Chang) and 2003 Heisman trophy winner Jason White (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_White_(American_football)).

2008 season
Cassel in action against the Broncos in October 2008

In the 2008 season opener (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_New_England_Patriots_season#Week_1:_vs._Kansa s_City_Chiefs) against the Kansas City Chiefs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Kansas_City_Chiefs_season), Cassel came under center when Brady suffered a torn ACL and MCL in the first quarter from a hit by Chiefs safety Bernard Pollard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Pollard). Cassel led the Patriots to a 17–10 victory, completing 13 of 18 passes for 152 yards and one touchdown; Cassel's drives accounted for all of New England's points.

The day after the game, the Patriots confirmed that Brady's serious injuries would sideline him for the rest of the season. Although the Patriots did bring veteran quarterbacks Chris Simms (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Simms) and Tim Rattay (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Rattay) to Foxborough,[18] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Cassel#cite_note-17) they signed neither, and kept Cassel as the starter.

Cassel made his first-ever start on Sunday, September 14, 2008, with a winning effort over the New York Jets (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_New_York_Jets_season), completing 16 of 23 passes for 165 yards; though he threw no touchdowns, he also threw no interceptions. The Patriots' 19–10 victory was the first time in six tries that a quarterback making his first NFL start defeated a team led by Brett Favre (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brett_Favre).[19] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Cassel#cite_note-18)

Cassel was voted AFC Offensive Player of the Week for his Week 7 performance against the Denver Broncos (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Denver_Broncos_season) on Monday Night Football (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monday_Night_Football). He had 183 passing yards and three touchdowns in a 41–7 rout (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_New_England_Patriots_season#Week_7:_vs._Denve r_Broncos), which made it his first three touchdown pass game.[20] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Cassel#cite_note-19)

Cassel scored the second rushing touchdown of his career on a 13-yard touchdown in Week 10 against the Buffalo Bills (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Buffalo_Bills_season). Cassel had zero touchdowns, but also zero interceptions, as he led the Patriots to a 20–10 win (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_New_England_Patriots_season#Week_10:_vs._Buff alo_Bills); the Patriots held the ball in the game for over 37 minutes; the final 19-play drive, which lasted over 9 minutes, tied a franchise record for most plays in a single drive.

In the Patriots' 34–31 overtime loss (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_New_England_Patriots_season#Week_11:_vs._New_ York_Jets) to the New York Jets, on November 13, 2008, Cassel led the Patriots on three unanswered scoring drives to bring them back from a 24–6 deficit with two minutes left in the first half, and threw a 16-yard touchdown to Randy Moss on 4th-and-1 with one second remaining to send the game into overtime. He finished 30-for-51 passing, with 400 yards, 3 touchdowns (and a pass for a two-point conversion), and no interceptions for a passer rating of 103.4, and 62 yards rushing on eight attempts. Cassel became the first Patriot to throw for 300 yards and rush for 50 yards in the same game, and the first player since at least the AFL-NFL merger (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AFL-NFL_merger) to have 400 passing yards and 60 rushing yards in the same game.[21] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Cassel#cite_note-20)

In Week 12, Cassel led the Patriots to a 48–28 win (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_New_England_Patriots_season#Week_12:_at_Miami _Dolphins) over the Miami Dolphins, who in Week 3 had ended the Patriots' NFL record 21-game regular season win streak. While Cassel threw for just 131 yards in the Week 3 loss, his Week 12 performance topped his performance against the Jets: Cassel completed 30 of 43 passes for 415 yards, three touchdowns to Randy Moss (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_Moss), and one interception, for a passer rating of 114.0; Cassel also had 14 yards on two rushes, including an 8-yard touchdown run.

The performance made Cassel the first quarterback in franchise history, and only the fifth quarterback in NFL history, to have consecutive games with 400+ yards passing. His efforts earned him the title of AFC Offensive Player of the Week for the second time.[22] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Cassel#cite_note-21)

In Week 15, against the Oakland Raiders (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Oakland_Raiders_season), Cassel, playing just six days after the death of his father, set a new personal best, throwing for four touchdowns in the Patriots' 49–26 rout (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_New_England_Patriots_season#Week_15:_at_Oakla nd_Raiders).[23] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Cassel#cite_note-22)

In Week 16, against the playoff-bound Arizona Cardinals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Arizona_Cardinals_season), Cassel led the Patriots to a 47–7 blowout win through snow, sleet, and rain in the Patriots' last regular-season home game of 2008. Cassel, playing in snow for the first time ever,[24] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Cassel#cite_note-23) nevertheless completed 20 of 36 passes for 345 yards, three touchdowns, and no interceptions, while helping the Patriots remain in the hunt for the AFC East title. In a role reversal, Matt Leinart entered the game as the Cardinals' backup quarterback when Kurt Warner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurt_Warner) was pulled from the game with the Cardinals trailing 44-0; Leinart completed 6 of 14 passes, for 138 yards, one touchdown, and one interception.[25] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Cassel#cite_note-24)

In Week 17, Cassel led the Patriots to their fourth consecutive win, 13–0 over the Buffalo Bills (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Buffalo_Bills_season) in a game marked by winds so severe that they bent the goalposts both before and during the game.[26] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Cassel#cite_note-25) Cassel completed 6 passes out of just 8 attempts, the second-lowest attempt total in franchise history (the lowest being the 5 attempts of the 1982 Snowplow Game (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowplow_Game)).[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Cassel#cite_note-caution-7)

Cassel finished with 78 yards, zero touchdowns, and zero interceptions; his most notable play, however, was a quick kick punt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punt_(football)) on third down in the fourth quarter; with the wind at his back, Cassel's kick landed inside the 20, and then rolled towards the Bills' end zone before it was downed, stranding the Bills at their own 2-yard line, struggling against the wind, down two scores with five minutes remaining.

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 01:48 PM

Your logic doesn't make sense sir,I think you have watched to many movies the best way to get good at something is to practice at it whether it comes to playing football or fighting. I have been in many street fights and my training has helped me go from a good fighter to a great fighter I know how to throw punch, block a punch and even take a punch, I know how to get an opponent to the ground submit an opponent, and what to do if I get taken to the ground, but of course your 20 years of Hockey trained you much better.
You win bud. Toughest Crowd member award!! I'll give Dana a call and see if we can get you a match. I'll even have my boy Ryan Bader train with you. Oops, did I just suggest that I may be into MMA also? Anyhow, let me know and maybe I can put the two of you in touch. I know, Bader sucks and can't hold a candle to you or your trainers. I give, you win!

Connie Jo

08-11-2010, 01:50 PM

PS: Sorry for misspelling 'Cassel' - 'Cassell', haha. I know it's one 'l'...but when so many others spell it with two 'l's I find myself doing it too. That's my lame excuse for misspelling, when I know better, lol.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 01:50 PM

I don't understand why everyone says that Cassel has a weak arm.. I just don't see it. Does he have a cannon? no.. But he has just as strong a arm as montana, brady, ryan, sanchez, brees.

http://www.youtube.com/user/ChiefsGo81#p/u/13/3HLwai_yV4A

I don't think he has like a Chad Pennington type weak arm but he would often throw the ball short. Brodie Croyle can throw the ball 68 yards he did so at the qb comp I would put Cassell at 50-55 range which is below average.

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 01:50 PM

Cassel was getting pressured but it's not just as simple as saying that the O Line was bad part of it was that he does tend to hold on to the ball to long. Even the best O lines can only give a QB a certain amount of time before they get to the QB. That is my biggest issue with Cassel. He has to get rid of the ball. If he does this again then we have to see how much of it was the O line was bad how much of it was Cassel holding on to the football when it's time to throw the ball away.

I can't say that I have a lot of confidence about the O line what I am saying is with the new coaching with a year now under guys belts in this offense. How much improvement will we see. That is a question that we will only be able to answer once the games start. I am giveing it a chance.

Let me put it this way. I have seen nothing from three of our five offensive line starters (Albert, O'Callaghan, and Niswanger) that shows they can be even average at their current position. Even though Lilja managed to be adequate on the Colts, he was let go for good reasons. He's undersized and injury-prone. Those issues will be compounded playing on grass with a questionable QB, as opposed to turf and Peyton Manning. And as much as I respect Waters, it's clear he's declining.

Every Chiefs fan has known that the offensive line is in tatters since 2006. Since that time, the front office has drafted and converted a RG to LT (Albert), signed an undrafted rookie to play C (Niswanger), used some lower draft picks on failures (Richardson, Brown, etc.), traded a low pick to the Dolphins for two failures (Ndukwe, and Alleman) and taken some flyers on some very low end FAs (Wade, Wiegmann, Lilja, O'Callaghan, etc.). They have not really addressed the problem in a meaningful way.

How many chances are you willing to give? Because I'm all out.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 01:52 PM

You win bud. Toughest Crowd member award!! I'll give Dana a call and see if we can get you a match. I'll even have my boy Ryan Bader train with you. Oops, did I just suggest that I may be into MMA also? Anyhow, let me know and maybe I can put the two of you in touch. I know, Bader sucks and can't hold a candle to you or your trainers. I give, you win!

First off Bader is a badass I never talked trash on any MMA fighter, that's something you did sir. Not to mention you started the fight with me. The thing is neither of us won, just two idiots talking trash over the internet.
:efpge:

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 01:54 PM

Let me put it this way. I have seen nothing from three of our five offensive line starters (Albert, O'Callaghan, and Niswanger) that shows they can be even average at their current position. Even though Lilja managed to be adequate on the Colts, he was let go for good reasons. He's undersized and injury-prone. Those issues will be compounded playing on grass with a questionable QB, as opposed to turf and Peyton Manning. And as much as I respect Waters, it's clear he's declining.

Every Chiefs fan has known that the offensive line is in tatters since 2006. Since that time, the front office has drafted and converted a RG to LT (Albert), signed an undrafted rookie to play C (Niswanger), used some lower draft picks on failures (Richardson, Brown, etc.), traded a low pick to the Dolphins for two failures (Ndukwe, and Alleman) and taken some flyers on some very low end FAs (Wade, Wiegmann, Lilja, O'Callaghan, etc.). They have not really addressed the problem in a meaningful way.

How many chances are you willing to give? Because I'm all out.

I agree who did you want us to draft in 2010?

matthewschiefs

08-11-2010, 01:58 PM

Let me put it this way. I have seen nothing from three of our five offensive line starters (Albert, O'Callaghan, and Niswanger) that shows they can be even average at their current position. Even though Lilja managed to be adequate on the Colts, he was let go for good reasons. He's undersized and injury-prone. Those issues will be compounded playing on grass with a questionable QB, as opposed to turf and Peyton Manning. And as much as I respect Waters, it's clear he's declining.

Every Chiefs fan has known that the offensive line is in tatters since 2006. Since that time, the front office has drafted and converted a RG to LT (Albert), signed an undrafted rookie to play C (Niswanger), used some lower draft picks on failures (Richardson, Brown, etc.), traded a low pick to the Dolphins for two failures (Ndukwe, and Alleman) and taken some flyers on some very low end FAs (Wade, Wiegmann, Lilja, O'Callaghan, etc.). They have not really addressed the problem in a meaningful way.

How many chances are you willing to give? Because I'm all out.

how many chances?

your giveing up because the former managment was STUPID. That doesn't mean that this managment is going to be any better or worse but there is hope they will be better. All I am saying is that it's to early to tell.

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 02:00 PM

Not quite the same, we have new coaches, including an OC. The team has another year of learning experience behind them, experience both as an individual player and as a team working together. Many other negative team factors aren't the same either...LJ is gone, to mention one of many.

I was talking about the talent, not the coaching. It's a lot easier to bring in good coaches to replace bad ones than it is to find good-to-great talent. Our starters are basically the same is my point. We're praying that they can be coached to another level than they've ever shown they can be. I've never seen that strategy work for any team, ever.

How can we rationally compare Cassell's age of 26 to that of those above 4-5 years younger, when Cassell wasn't given the same opportunity to start at a younger age that they were? How can he be in his QB prime, statistically speaking as a starter, when last season was only his 2nd year as a starter?

That's my point. You can't compare Cassel to those QBs. His physical prime is right now, whether or not his experience one is.

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 02:00 PM

First off Bader is a badass I never talked trash on any MMA fighter, that's something you did sir. Not to mention you started the fight with me. The thing is neither of us won, just two idiots talking trash over the internet.
:efpge:
Calling people a coward on the computer will get you into a lot of arguments son. This is where I train. Arizona Combat Sports Kickboxing, Mixed Martial Arts and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu (http://www.azcombatsports.com/)

fairladyZ

08-11-2010, 02:03 PM

I don't think he has like a Chad Pennington type weak arm but he would often throw the ball short. Brodie Croyle can throw the ball 68 yards he did so at the qb comp I would put Cassell at 50-55 range which is below average.

Ya and croyle has one of the strongest arms in the NFL.. So cassel can ATLEAST throw 55 cuz i have seen video of it.. and u say the guy has a weak arm over 13 yards?

Let me ask a a question.. How much time do you think u need for a receiver to get 68yrds down the field? Do you think we could honestly give cassel the time to wait for that?

OPLookn

08-11-2010, 02:09 PM

That's my point. You can't compare Cassel to those QBs. His physical prime is right now, whether or not his experience one is.

When a professional atheletes physical prime comes along is a moot point. Saying that 26 to 28 is a physical prime end of story would put people like Brett Farve or others that have played at a high level well past their defined "prime". Fact is you don't know when a athlete's prime was until it's past and you can say wow they've made a marked turn and gone waaaaay down hill. And one season isn't enough to say that!

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 02:14 PM

I don't think he has like a Chad Pennington type weak arm but he would often throw the ball short. Brodie Croyle can throw the ball 68 yards he did so at the qb comp I would put Cassell at 50-55 range which is below average.
You don't honestly believe Cassel can only throw the ball 55 yds do you? Chad Pennington could throw it that far for god sakes!

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 02:15 PM

I agree who did you want us to draft in 2010?

I posted is elsewhere right after the draft, but I thought we should have gone (I think this is my list):

I dunno, feel free to disagree, but I think this draft would be a whole lot better than our other one. I wouldn't have gotten the ILBs I wanted, nor a new SS, but you can't get everything in one draft.

Connie Jo

08-11-2010, 02:15 PM

I was talking about the talent, not the coaching. It's a lot easier to bring in good coaches to replace bad ones than it is to find good-to-great talent. Our starters are basically the same is my point. We're praying that they can be coached to another level than they've ever shown they can be. I've never seen that strategy work for any team, ever.

That's my point. You can't compare Cassel to those QBs. His physical prime is right now, whether or not his experience one is.

Okay, I pondered whether or not you were referring to his age from an experience as a starter, or physically...my bad for choosing the wrong point, haha.

Still, I know 4-5 years in physical age can make a huge difference in the NFL, but it does vary upon individual players physical capabilities. Many NFL players have remained starters effectively hitting 40...Testaverde, Brett Favre (almost 40), Blanda, Flutie...and those are just some QB's, there are others such as Morten Anderson, kicker. :D

Even at 28, if Cassel does as well as I and others believe he will for the Chiefs...he has several years ahead of him...it only takes one of those to lead us to a Super Bowl, which when it happens...I will be one very elated Chiefs Squaw! HA! :)

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 02:20 PM

how many chances?

your giveing up because the former managment was STUPID. That doesn't mean that this managment is going to be any better or worse but there is hope they will be better. All I am saying is that it's to early to tell.

Do you really believe that we've done everything we could do in the past two offseasons? Because I don't.

A lot of those things I mentioned were this management too (Alleman, Nduwke, Brown, O'Callaghan, Lilja, Wiegmann). We've had two offseasons to fix our OL now. In that time, we signed a waiver wire RT, traded for two stiffs (one of whom's gone already), overdrafted a massive project in Brown, signed undersized stopgaps in Wiegmann and Lilja, and drafted a RG with promise in Asamoah. Of all those moves, only the Asamoah one was a competent one.

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 02:20 PM

Okay, I pondered whether or not you were referring to his age from an experience as a starter, or physically...my bad for choosing the wrong point, haha.

Still, I know 4-5 years in physical age can make a huge difference in the NFL, but it does vary upon individual players physical capabilities. Many NFL players have remained starters effectively hitting 40...Testaverde, Brett Favre (almost 40), Blanda, Flutie...and those are just some QB's, there are others such as Morten Anderson, kicker. :D

Even at 28, if Cassel does as well as I and others believe he will for the Chiefs...he has several years ahead of him...it only takes one of those to lead us to a Super Bowl, which when it happens...I will be one very elated Chiefs Squaw! HA! :)
I'm guessing less than 1% of NFL players even get to that age in their careers let alone are successful.

Connie Jo

08-11-2010, 02:28 PM

I'm guessing less than 1% of NFL players even get to that age in their careers let alone are successful.

No doubt, just saying many have done it successfully, more specifically QB's. Cassel should have at least 5 years of prime NFL age for a QB remaining. Assuming he's not seriously injured of course.

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 02:32 PM

Okay, I pondered whether or not you were referring to his age from an experience as a starter, or physically...my bad for choosing the wrong point, haha.

Still, I know 4-5 years in physical age can make a huge difference in the NFL, but it does vary upon individual players physical capabilities. Many NFL players have remained starters effectively hitting 40...Testaverde, Brett Favre (almost 40), Blanda, Flutie...and those are just some QB's, there are others such as Morten Anderson, kicker. :D

Even at 28, if Cassel does as well as I and others believe he will for the Chiefs...he has several years ahead of him...it only takes one of those to lead us to a Super Bowl, which when it happens...I will be one very elated Chiefs Squaw! HA! :)

Yeah, but Favre, Flutie, Anderson, Testaverde, etc. were already stars in their 20s. They just had longevity. They got smarter and more accurate with age to make up for their physical shortcomings. Cassel doesn't have the advantage of a learning curve due to his late start.

Look, I like Cassel and feel that his bad year last year was in large part due to lousy supporting cast. But odds are that he won't be in the league seven years from now. We don't have time for him to have a typical rookie QB curve. He needs to do great this year, or we need to look elsewhere.

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 02:38 PM

No doubt, just saying many have done it successfully, more specifically QB's. Cassel should have at least 5 years of prime NFL age for a QB remaining. Assuming he's not seriously injured of course.
Agreed

Canada

08-11-2010, 02:38 PM

You win bud. Toughest Crowd member award!!

Ahem...

Calling people a coward on the computer will get you into a lot of arguments son. This is where I train. Arizona Combat Sports Kickboxing, Mixed Martial Arts and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu (http://www.azcombatsports.com/)

Which girl are you? :D

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 02:39 PM

Calling people a coward on the computer will get you into a lot of arguments son. This is where I train. Arizona Combat Sports Kickboxing, Mixed Martial Arts and Brazilian Jiu Jitsu (http://www.azcombatsports.com/)

I have siblings older then you sir, so I don't think the son remark fits. I am familar with arizona combat it's a fine school I train at Crawfords MMA in overland park ks, if I ever go to Arizona I would love to stop by looks like really good facility.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 02:40 PM

Ahem...

Which girl are you? :D

:lol:she looks pretty tough

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 02:42 PM

Yeah, but Favre, Flutie, Anderson, Testaverde, etc. were already stars in their 20s. They just had longevity. They got smarter and more accurate with age to make up for their physical shortcomings. Cassel doesn't have the advantage of a learning curve due to his late start.

Look, I like Cassel and feel that his bad year last year was in large part due to lousy supporting cast. But odds are that he won't be in the league seven years from now. We don't have time for him to have a typical rookie QB curve. He needs to do great this year, or we need to look elsewhere.
IMO, there are a ton of avg QB's that have had success in this league. I think Cassel is one of those avg QB's that could have success. I don't think the grass is always greener and when a team looks elsewhere for a QB and doesn't effectively give the QB position the tools needed to succeed, they sometimes take 2 steps back when attaining a new QB because they have to learn the system which most of the time takes an entire season. Improve the line and your QB is 50% better immediately. No matter who it is.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 02:47 PM

I posted is elsewhere right after the draft, but I thought we should have gone (I think this is my list):

I dunno, feel free to disagree, but I think this draft would be a whole lot better than our other one. I wouldn't have gotten the ILBs I wanted, nor a new SS, but you can't get everything in one draft.

I was a huge Okung fan as well, in 2009 I wanted Orakpo so I think we are both on the same page of building up the lines. I like your list it's very close to mine, I did however want us to pick up golden tate or Jordan Shipley and put either one of them as a slot receiver

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 02:50 PM

Ahem...

Which girl are you? :D
The hot one!:mooning:

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 02:50 PM

[quote=figcrostic;195551]I have siblings older then you sir, so I don't think the son remark fits. I am familar with arizona combat it's a fine school I train at Crawfords MMA in overland park ks, if I ever go to Arizona I would love to stop by looks like really good facility.[/quote

Connie Jo

08-11-2010, 02:53 PM

Yeah, but Favre, Flutie, Anderson, Testaverde, etc. were already stars in their 20s. They just had longevity. They got smarter and more accurate with age to make up for their physical shortcomings. Cassel doesn't have the advantage of a learning curve due to his late start.

Look, I like Cassel and feel that his bad year last year was in large part due to lousy supporting cast. But odds are that he won't be in the league seven years from now. We don't have time for him to have a typical rookie QB curve. He needs to do great this year, or we need to look elsewhere.

Considering Cassel was one of the few, possibly only Chief...who dedicated himself with continuing to work daily on improving his game during the entire off season...I think he realizes he needs a good 2010 showing. The hurdle he faces isn't himself in my opinion, rather among his teammates to have the same dedication and hard work ethics.

Let's hope they do, because it was obvious to me during last season, that many Chiefs did not have their heart in the game, nor were putting forth their best effort. :(

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 02:53 PM

The hot one!:mooning:

Nice maybe I will be driving to Arizona, but the fights gonna start in your guard.:lol:

Canada

08-11-2010, 02:54 PM

Maybe you guys should continure this "fight" in a PM??

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 02:56 PM

Maybe you guys should continure this "fight" in a PM??

I'm trying to end it but thanks for the advice :sFl_canada2:

matthewschiefs

08-11-2010, 02:57 PM

Do you really believe that we've done everything we could do in the past two offseasons? Because I don't.

A lot of those things I mentioned were this management too (Alleman, Nduwke, Brown, O'Callaghan, Lilja, Wiegmann). We've had two offseasons to fix our OL now. In that time, we signed a waiver wire RT, traded for two stiffs (one of whom's gone already), overdrafted a massive project in Brown, signed undersized stopgaps in Wiegmann and Lilja, and drafted a RG with promise in Asamoah. Of all those moves, only the Asamoah one was a competent one.

Getting guys in the NFL is much easier said then done. You can't just say Hey other team i want that guy and get him. You have to give them time.

Don't you recall all the years we went out and just got this guy or that guy to try to fill the wholes. How did that work out. How many playoff wins? It's not a bad thing that we have not gone out and got every name that we could have. We tried that IT DIDN'T WORK. Now we are building anther way. It may not be what you like but give it time it may just work out.

2 offseasons in a lot of ways is only 1. This is the first full offseason that we have had the coaching staff in place under Pioli and Haley. As a fan we owe it to our team to give them time not just declare you no more then them and the sky is falling.

Canada

08-11-2010, 02:57 PM

I'm trying to end it but thanks for the advice :sFl_canada2::bananen_smilies046:

Getting guys in the NFL is much easier said then done. You can't just say Hey other team i want that guy and get him. You have to give them time.

Don't you recall all the years we went out and just got this guy or that guy to try to fill the wholes. How did that work out. How many playoff wins? It's not a bad thing that we have not gone out and got every name that we could have. We tried that IT DIDN'T WORK. Now we are building anther way. It may not be what you like but give it time it may just work out.

2 offseasons in a lot of ways is only 1. This is the first full offseason that we have had the coaching staff in place under Pioli and Haley. As a fan we owe it to our team to give them time not just declare you no more then them and the sky is falling.

No, two offseasons is in every real way two offseasons, no matter the coordinators brought in later.

We're not filling holes, either through the draft or FA. We're pretending holes don't exist. It's one thing to draft a RT and groom him as opposed to splurging in FA. It's another to stick with one of the worst (if not the worst) RTs in NFL for a second year. The way we're building now is the exact same way Herm did. Trying to turn other people's trash into treasures, hoping that a bunch of low-drafted or undrafted rookies pan out, and hoping that our schemes are good enough to overcome the lack of talent within them.

Some teams build really well using only the draft (Packers, Colts). Some teams build well using FA as their primary tool (Saints, Jets). Others tend to mix the two (Patriots, Giants). While each of these teams was built differently, they all did the same four things: (1) hire a good HC; (2) sign or draft a great QB; (3) build the OL; and (4) build the defensive front 7.

We're still unsure as to the first two. We haven't done the second two. I don't care how we get a real RT (or SS, or C, or RG, or NT, or ILBs, or ROLB), whether by trade, by draft, or by FA. All I care about is that we get them. We aren't going to win games until we do. If our GM can't get them, then he shouldn't be our GM.

matthewschiefs

08-11-2010, 03:34 PM

No, two offseasons is in every real way two offseasons, no matter the coordinators brought in later.

We're not filling holes, either through the draft or FA. We're pretending holes don't exist. It's one thing to draft a RT and groom him as opposed to splurging in FA. It's another to stick with one of the worst (if not the worst) RTs in NFL for a second year. The way we're building now is the exact same way Herm did. Trying to turn other people's trash into treasures, hoping that a bunch of low-drafted or undrafted rookies pan out, and hoping that our schemes are good enough to overcome the lack of talent within them.

Some teams build really well using only the draft (Packers, Colts). Some teams build well using FA as their primary tool (Saints, Jets). Others tend to mix the two (Patriots, Giants). While each of these teams was built differently, they all did the same four things: (1) hire a good HC; (2) sign or draft a great QB; (3) build the OL; and (4) build the defensive front 7.

We're still unsure as to the first two. We haven't done the second two. I don't care how we get a real RT (or SS, or C, or RG, or NT, or ILBs, or ROLB), whether by trade, by draft, or by FA. All I care about is that we get them. We aren't going to win games until we do. If our GM can't get them, then he shouldn't be our GM.

What your not getting is that it takes two teams to make trades. It takes a player that wants to come to KC a team that has won 6 games in 2 years. It's hard to talk people into come to your team when you have won so little. You CAN NOT JUST SAY I WANT THIS GUY AND BOOM HE"S THERE. I don't want to make trades for the sake of getting players at one spot or two because that means we are giveing something up as well. And lets face it right now we are NOT a team that has a lot of depth at many spots. Just trying to win now without thinking about your future is not a wise why to build a team. It takes time to build a team. This is year two. And we don't even no how good or bad this team is yet. What you are doing is just saying They didn't get who I wanted so they did nothing. GIVE THIS TEAM A FREAKING CHANCE.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 03:37 PM

LOL This is my favorite 'battle' smiley:

http://www.chiefscrowd.com/forums/images/imported/2010/02/20.jpg

Very nice I didn't see that one on here.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 03:51 PM

What your not getting is that it takes two teams to make trades. It takes a player that wants to come to KC a team that has won 6 games in 2 years. It's hard to talk people into come to your team when you have won so little. You CAN NOT JUST SAY I WANT THIS GUY AND BOOM HE"S THERE. I don't want to make trades for the sake of getting players at one spot or two because that means we are giveing something up as well. And lets face it right now we are NOT a team that has a lot of depth at many spots. Just trying to win now without thinking about your future is not a wise why to build a team. It takes time to build a team. This is year two. And we don't even no how good or bad this team is yet. What you are doing is just saying They didn't get who I wanted so they did nothing. GIVE THIS TEAM A FREAKING CHANCE.

That's how it works in Madden so your wrong :meow:

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 04:23 PM

What your not getting is that it takes two teams to make trades. It takes a player that wants to come to KC a team that has won 6 games in 2 years. It's hard to talk people into come to your team when you have won so little. You CAN NOT JUST SAY I WANT THIS GUY AND BOOM HE"S THERE. I don't want to make trades for the sake of getting players at one spot or two because that means we are giveing something up as well. And lets face it right now we are NOT a team that has a lot of depth at many spots. Just trying to win now without thinking about your future is not a wise why to build a team. It takes time to build a team. This is year two. And we don't even no how good or bad this team is yet. What you are doing is just saying They didn't get who I wanted so they did nothing. GIVE THIS TEAM A FREAKING CHANCE.

I know that it takes two teams to make trades. I know that most FAs are reluctant to sign with a franchase that's gone 10-38 over the past three seasons, especially if you're unwilling to overpay. I know that the draft is a gamble, and it's very unlikely that every pick will turn out. Everyone knows these things.

But you never answered my question. How many years do you think it takes? Teams have turned things around in a couple years. The Pats jump immediately to mind. So do Atlanta, Cincinatti, and Arizona. If we go 3-13 next season (and I really hope we don't), do you think we'll need 2012 to evaluate as well? When do you stop and say that the GM is doing a bad job?

And here's why I think he's doing a bad job right now. Look at our 2008 team that went 2-14 and (thankfully and finally) got Herm fired. Despite the fact that we radically revamped our schemes, we're starting many the same exact people: Bowe, Albert, Waters, Niswanger, Dorsey, Edwards, DJ, Page, Flowers, Carr, Page, Hali, D. Williams, Cox, and Charles. 15 of our 22 (probable) starters in 2010 started (at least a few games) on that team! And the best offensive and defensive starter from 2008 (Pollard and Tony G.) we shipped out in 2009. Now, some of these guys I listed I really like (Hali, Flowers, Waters, Charles). But we didn't go 2-14 in 2008 because that group was extremely talented. And teams don't go 2-14 just because of bad coaching. They go 2-14 because the players just aren't good enough.

So what's changed from 2008 to now? Some players have matured (Charles, Flowers). Some have declined (Waters, Edwards). We have new schemes and coordinators. But we look largely the same. A bad OL, a bad front 7, a QB who's going to take a beating, RBs who will be facing a lot of eight man fronts, and a HC and GM stubbornly sticking to a plan at the expense of winning games.

A GM's job is to build a teams roster. If the GM is unable to build a roster in a league as devoted to parity as the NFL is, he doesn't deserve to be a GM. His difficulties in trading, drafting, or signing FAs is unimportant. He just can't do the job.

Pro_Angler

08-11-2010, 04:40 PM

And your somehow more intelligent than I am because you can throw out random insults to strangers on the internet, and misspell the word "support"? I don't know you, and you don't know me. If you wanna have a rational discussion, your more then welcome, but if you wanna act like a lil coward who says insulting things over the internet that you would never say in person, because you would get punched in the face for then go to another thread.

I would in fact say it to your face , infact i would say a great deal more since i would get booted for saying what I want to say!!!!!!!!!!!! I am 6' 3" 240lbs 38 years old I served my country for 8 years in the Army and i am now a police officer, I am not afraid to tell anyone what I think on the net or in person! I am a very civil person, but I have seen chit that you cant even imagine, so I dont have the patience for someone like yourself!! I am done with you!
We dont need your negativeness here!!

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 04:47 PM

I would in fact say it to your face , infact i would say a great deal more since i would get booted for saying what I want to say!!!!!!!!!!!! I am 6' 3" 240lbs 38 years old I served my country for 8 years in the Army and i am now a police officer, I am not afraid to tell anyone what I think on the net or in person! I am a very civil person, but I have seen chit that you cant even imagine, so I dont have the patience for someone like yourself!! I am done with you!
We dont need your negativeness here!!

Great another person trying to beat me up over the internet.

matthewschiefs

08-11-2010, 04:52 PM

I know that it takes two teams to make trades. I know that most FAs are reluctant to sign with a franchase that's gone 10-38 over the past three seasons, especially if you're unwilling to overpay. I know that the draft is a gamble, and it's very unlikely that every pick will turn out. Everyone knows these things.

But you never answered my question. How many years do you think it takes? Teams have turned things around in a couple years. The Pats jump immediately to mind. So do Atlanta, Cincinatti, and Arizona. If we go 3-13 next season (and I really hope we don't), do you think we'll need 2012 to evaluate as well? When do you stop and say that the GM is doing a bad job?

And here's why I think he's doing a bad job right now. Look at our 2008 team that went 2-14 and (thankfully and finally) got Herm fired. Despite the fact that we radically revamped our schemes, we're starting many the same exact people: Bowe, Albert, Waters, Niswanger, Dorsey, Edwards, DJ, Page, Flowers, Carr, Page, Hali, D. Williams, Cox, and Charles. 15 of our 22 (probable) starters in 2010 started (at least a few games) on that team! And the best offensive and defensive starter from 2008 (Pollard and Tony G.) we shipped out in 2009. Now, some of these guys I listed I really like (Hali, Flowers, Waters, Charles). But we didn't go 2-14 in 2008 because that group was extremely talented. And teams don't go 2-14 just because of bad coaching. They go 2-14 because the players just aren't good enough.

So what's changed from 2008 to now? Some players have matured (Charles, Flowers). Some have declined (Waters, Edwards). We have new schemes and coordinators. But we look largely the same. A bad OL, a bad front 7, a QB who's going to take a beating, RBs who will be facing a lot of eight man fronts, and a HC and GM stubbornly sticking to a plan at the expense of winning games.

A GM's job is to build a teams roster. If the GM is unable to build a roster in a league as devoted to parity as the NFL is, he doesn't deserve to be a GM. His difficulties in trading, drafting, or signing FAs is unimportant. He just can't do the job.

That's that attitude that I have the problem with. You talking like the season has already finished and we were just as bad.

If and thats a big if this team were to go 3-13 I would say that there needs to be a change in how we go about things. But we don't no no if that will even come close to our record so why think about it until we are there. If we were to go 13-3 with these guys Would you still want all of these guys gone. I no 13-3 is not likely but seeing that this team now has much better coaching and is in much better shape then they were last season I don't think that 3-13 is likely either.

We might have a lot of the same players as 08 but it's not like we have added no one. Chambers,Cassle,Vrable just to name a few and two draft classes now that it's far to early to tell on. Your whats right now approach is not a way to build a team either. Under you thinking guys like farve Warrner would never have gotten a chance in green bay st louis. I think that both teams would take what they got from those two players. You have to show a little bit of patience with players. Albert who you have deemed already a bust it seems is comeing into his 3rd nfl season. That's about when you see what guys have for NFL play. Giveing up on him no does no good.

Pro_Angler

08-11-2010, 04:57 PM

Great another person trying to beat me up over the internet.

Your the one who said you'd punch me in the face!! You are obviously a idiot like i said!! I originally didnt mean it as that way but now I do in every sence of the word!
You need to grow up! You say you were in the marines?? Obviously you didnt get anything out of it besides a bad attitude and a ars wooping in a ^$^$ measuring contest!

Pro_Angler

08-11-2010, 05:02 PM

Like i said I too was not and still am not sold on Matt , last year was far from his fault and I see that. I am very interested to see what he does over the next two seasons.
As a Chiefs fan we have enough issues with the team to be ever telling our peers that "Iwill punch you in the mouth" (because i took something out of context). I can almost see people getting this angry in the middle of last year, but with the season about to start and we have a great deal of positives out of camp, we should be excited!!

FYI see a doctor and get some meds figrostic

matthewschiefs

08-11-2010, 05:06 PM

a HC and GM stubbornly sticking to a plan at the expense of winning games.

Forgot to address this in my other post. But how can you say thats what they are doing? When you double a teams wins in one year that is thought of a sign that you are headed in the right direction. I no that saying that 2 wins to 4 is not that hard but It's a start. Untill they are not improveing there is no reason to think they are just sticking to the gameplan at the expense of wins.

Pro_Angler

08-11-2010, 05:10 PM

dang nice butt hillbilly.. im in arizona too..tucson.. can I come train with you too? I need to learn how to fight too so i can beat up internet bullies too....

#58ChiefsFan

08-11-2010, 05:23 PM

I respect your opinion and I'm glad you didn't put something ignorant like everyone else just accusing me of being a hater. I know Charlie Weis is seeing improvement, but really what is he supposed to say? These guys suck I shouldn't have taken this job because they will make me look bad. I think you and I are both in agreement that Matt Cassel is an average guy QB. I know everyone on here is telling me to shut up because Matt is our QB but I am tired of accepting mediocrity from my team that I love so much. I believe if Matt Cassel becomes our permanent guy that we will be a running team I don't see Matt winning games based on his arm I see him as a poor man's Huard I say poor man's because Huard was more accurate.

Wow this thread has taken an ugly couple turns.

I agree with you that Cassel is an average qb at this point, I think I'm a little more optimistic about his future is all.

One point being that Matt was only sacked eight times in the last six games. Compare that to 37 in the first 10 weeks. That is improvement from the entire offense, Jamaal in particular.

As far as his contract, that is a problem created by the patriots putting a franchise tag on him for one year at 14.5 million. His contract is for 28 million guaranteed, people throw the 60 mil figure around too much.

A point I agree with you is he is slated to make 11.75 this year which is top 5 for the league iirc. To an outsider looking at our team it seems ridiculous, thing is he is due a 7.5 bonus next year which I think makes this his make or break year. His contract is front loaded and we had the money at the time so I am ok with the gamble.

Pioli drafted Cassel and while we have not added a ton of stars whether they came from college or the NFL this year the additions to the coaching staff make up for that to me. Given there track record of developing average players like our guys into a group that can win superbowl I think we are in fine shape for the future.

I still believe Matt will be here for years and go from an average qb now to a great qb soon. By great I am saying top ten in the league not elite but a guy that will get us where we want to go.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 05:30 PM

Like i said I too was not and still am not sold on Matt , last year was far from his fault and I see that. I am very interested to see what he does over the next two seasons.
As a Chiefs fan we have enough issues with the team to be ever telling our peers that "Iwill punch you in the mouth" (because i took something out of context). I can almost see people getting this angry in the middle of last year, but with the season about to start and we have a great deal of positives out of camp, we should be excited!!

FYI see a doctor and get some meds figrostic

I never threatened to punch anyone in the mouth I suggested calling a person names in real life could lead to you being punched in the face. I am an adult and I don't punch people for calling me names.

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 05:34 PM

That's that attitude that I have the problem with. You talking like the season has already finished and we were just as bad.

If and thats a big if this team were to go 3-13 I would say that there needs to be a change in how we go about things. But we don't no no if that will even come close to our record so why think about it until we are there. If we were to go 13-3 with these guys Would you still want all of these guys gone. I no 13-3 is not likely but seeing that this team now has much better coaching and is in much better shape then they were last season I don't think that 3-13 is likely either.

We might have a lot of the same players as 08 but it's not like we have added no one. Chambers,Cassle,Vrable just to name a few and two draft classes now that it's far to early to tell on. Your whats right now approach is not a way to build a team either. Under you thinking guys like farve Warrner would never have gotten a chance in green bay st louis. I think that both teams would take what they got from those two players. You have to show a little bit of patience with players. Albert who you have deemed already a bust it seems is comeing into his 3rd nfl season. That's about when you see what guys have for NFL play. Giveing up on him no does no good.

Sure, I'm judging the team on my perception of them right now. Just as those who love where the team's at are doing. When you say we're improved, you're doing the same - redicting how the season will go and how the players will do. That's what we do until the games are played, and at that point we start talking about the next season.

The point of 3-13 (or any record) is to demonstrate that some fans will always be hoping "next year, it'll all be better," depsite nothing really changing. Every single fan of every single fanbase believes that its players would be good if they had more time and better coaching. If we go 13-3, I'll be thrilled. I'd re-evaluate my opinions of the various players and coaches. I'd re-evaluate how I think teams should be built. It would be immense for me. But I don't think we're going 13-3, precisely because nothing in my football experience leads me to believe that our team as currently constituted can succeed.

As for vastly improved coaching, let me ask you this. Can you think of a single time in NFL history when a new HC/GM came into a bad team (not a good team in a bad year), kept most of the players, and turned them around? I can't. HC/GMs that have turned around bad teams have done so by rebuilding the rosters from the ground up. Not by trolling undrafted FAs for guys who will sign cheap.

We have added some starters in the 2009 and 2010 offseasons. As far as vets, we've added Cassel (jury's still out), Chambers and Vrabel (both on the decline), Lilja (undersized and injury-prone castoff), O'Callaghan (second worst RT in the NFL), Mays (worst starting ILB in the NFL), Pope (average TE), and Thomas Jones (great signing). We drafted starters in Berry (good pick, though I'd have gone Okung), TJ (terrible rookie season), and maybe Moeaki (injury-prone) and K. Lewis (out-of-position at SS).

Simply put, I think we're just whiffing on our player selections. We're drafting badly and signing bad FAs. I think our HC and GM think they're way smarter than they actually are and ignoring big holes on both sides of the ball. I think our inactivity in FA is more due to cheapness than any theory on how to rebuild the team.

I know you really want to paint me as someone who wants to splurge big in FA to win now, but that just isn't true. It doesn't matter if you get your RT (or SS or ROLB or NT or any other position) in FA, in the draft, or by trade. But you need a good RT. We haven't drafted one (we tried in Colin Brown and failed), we haven't traded for one (we tried with Ndukwe and failed), and we haven't in free agency (we tried with O'Callaghan and failed). It's the failure to get talented players, not the method of the failure, that makes me very, very pessimistic about our short-term future.

Albert is a bust at LT. He needs to be moved to RT, or better yet inside to OG. And giving a player a 2nd chance is great, so long as that player is good. Knowing what constitutes a good player or a bad one is what GMs get paid to do. If a GM signs a bunch of untalented players, he doesn't deserve a gold star for trying.

I don't know if this is fair or not, but when I read posts like your last one, I think that some fans are willing to accept mediocrity or worse every single year. They'll pump themselves up with the idea that, even though the team refuses to spend money, refuses to draft for need, and keeps most of the same players, everything will be better next year. Guess what? It almost never is.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 05:38 PM

Wow this thread has taken an ugly couple turns.

I agree with you that Cassel is an average qb at this point, I think I'm a little more optimistic about his future is all.

One point being that Matt was only sacked eight times in the last six games. Compare that to 37 in the first 10 weeks. That is improvement from the entire offense, Jamaal in particular.

As far as his contract, that is a problem created by the patriots putting a franchise tag on him for one year at 14.5 million. His contract is for 28 million guaranteed, people throw the 60 mil figure around too much.

A point I agree with you is he is slated to make 11.75 this year which is top 5 for the league iirc. To an outsider looking at our team it seems ridiculous, thing is he is due a 7.5 bonus next year which I think makes this his make or break year. His contract is front loaded and we had the money at the time so I am ok with the gamble.

Pioli drafted Cassel and while we have not added a ton of stars whether they came from college or the NFL this year the additions to the coaching staff make up for that to me. Given there track record of developing average players like our guys into a group that can win superbowl I think we are in fine shape for the future.

I still believe Matt will be here for years and go from an average qb now to a great qb soon. By great I am saying top ten in the league not elite but a guy that will get us where we want to go.

I agree this thread has gotten very ugly, honestly if Matt becomes top 15 I will be happy, but I don't see that happening any time soon.

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 05:39 PM

Forgot to address this in my other post. But how can you say thats what they are doing? When you double a teams wins in one year that is thought of a sign that you are headed in the right direction. I no that saying that 2 wins to 4 is not that hard but It's a start. Untill they are not improveing there is no reason to think they are just sticking to the gameplan at the expense of wins.

Doubling your win total from 2 to 4 says nothing about your direction. Look at the Raiders from 2006 to 2007 for a good example. From 2 wins to 4, then mediocrity.

Sticking with the same schemes and (mostly) the same roster is sticking with same gameplan. That's what we're doing.

matthewschiefs

08-11-2010, 06:00 PM

Sure, I'm judging the team on my perception of them right now. Just as those who love where the team's at are doing. When you say we're improved, you're doing the same - redicting how the season will go and how the players will do. That's what we do until the games are played, and at that point we start talking about the next season.

The point of 3-13 (or any record) is to demonstrate that some fans will always be hoping "next year, it'll all be better," depsite nothing really changing. Every single fan of every single fanbase believes that its players would be good if they had more time and better coaching. If we go 13-3, I'll be thrilled. I'd re-evaluate my opinions of the various players and coaches. I'd re-evaluate how I think teams should be built. It would be immense for me. But I don't think we're going 13-3, precisely because nothing in my football experience leads me to believe that our team as currently constituted can succeed.

As for vastly improved coaching, let me ask you this. Can you think of a single time in NFL history when a new HC/GM came into a bad team (not a good team in a bad year), kept most of the players, and turned them around? I can't. HC/GMs that have turned around bad teams have done so by rebuilding the rosters from the ground up. Not by trolling undrafted FAs for guys who will sign cheap.

We have added some starters in the 2009 and 2010 offseasons. As far as vets, we've added Cassel (jury's still out), Chambers and Vrabel (both on the decline), Lilja (undersized and injury-prone castoff), O'Callaghan (second worst RT in the NFL), Mays (worst starting ILB in the NFL), Pope (average TE), and Thomas Jones (great signing). We drafted starters in Berry (good pick, though I'd have gone Okung), TJ (terrible rookie season), and maybe Moeaki (injury-prone) and K. Lewis (out-of-position at SS).

Simply put, I think we're just whiffing on our player selections. We're drafting badly and signing bad FAs. I think our HC and GM think they're way smarter than they actually are and ignoring big holes on both sides of the ball. I think our inactivity in FA is more due to cheapness than any theory on how to rebuild the team.

I know you really want to paint me as someone who wants to splurge big in FA to win now, but that just isn't true. It doesn't matter if you get your RT (or SS or ROLB or NT or any other position) in FA, in the draft, or by trade. But you need a good RT. We haven't drafted one (we tried in Colin Brown and failed), we haven't traded for one (we tried with Ndukwe and failed), and we haven't in free agency (we tried with O'Callaghan and failed). It's the failure to get talented players, not the method of the failure, that makes me very, very pessimistic about our short-term future.

Albert is a bust at LT. He needs to be moved to RT, or better yet inside to OG. And giving a player a 2nd chance is great, so long as that player is good. Knowing what constitutes a good player or a bad one is what GMs get paid to do. If a GM signs a bunch of untalented players, he doesn't deserve a gold star for trying.

I don't know if this is fair or not, but when I read posts like your last one, I think that some fans are willing to accept mediocrity or worse every single year. They'll pump themselves up with the idea that, even though the team refuses to spend money, refuses to draft for need, and keeps most of the same players, everything will be better next year. Guess what? It almost never is.

I think it's more the way you present your arguments that I have a problem with. Like when you say we have the worst o line in the NFL. When we have added 2 free agents and a draft pick it's not possible to say that till we see them play. Or when you say Albert is a bust. That's not a fact at this time. Like I said most players take 3 years to know what you get. This will be Alberts 3rd season. All I am saying is that You just can't give up on a young guy just because they are not pro bowlers there first few seasons. Sure some guys are but that's not the case with all guys that turn out to be great players.

I am not one to accept just being Ok. Fact is I want to win the superbowl this year. But you also have to no that a entire new management team in the GM and Head coach that took over a 2-14 football team is not going to make a superbowl team overnight. This is the start of the 2nd season. All i am saying is that it's still to early to throw in the towel on this team or this management.

matthewschiefs

08-11-2010, 06:01 PM

Doubling your win total from 2 to 4 says nothing about your direction. Look at the Raiders from 2006 to 2007 for a good example. From 2 wins to 4, then mediocrity.

Sticking with the same schemes and (mostly) the same roster is sticking with same gameplan. That's what we're doing.

That might happen in KC we don't no yet. But you said they were stubbornly sticking to the plan at the expense of wins. When that at this time is not the case.

bbacker51

08-11-2010, 06:08 PM

:meow:

Canada

08-11-2010, 06:20 PM

But you never answered my question. How many years do you think it takes? Teams have turned things around in a couple years. The Pats jump immediately to mind. So do Atlanta, Cincinatti, and Arizona. If we go 3-13 next season (and I really hope we don't), do you think we'll need 2012 to evaluate as well? When do you stop and say that the GM is doing a bad job?

Are you saying that Cincy, Arizona Atl, and NE turned it all around in a year or two? Last I checked, those teams had years upon years of being sh!t teams. they didnt change overnight.

Canada

08-11-2010, 06:22 PM

Doubling your win total from 2 to 4 says nothing about your direction. Look at the Raiders from 2006 to 2007 for a good example. From 2 wins to 4, then mediocrity.

Sticking with the same schemes and (mostly) the same roster is sticking with same gameplan. That's what we're doing.

so we are supposed to scrap the system that we have had in place for one year, the same system that the players have spent that year learning, the same system that Weiss and Crennel were brought in to run? That is how we build a winner?

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 06:32 PM

I think it's more the way you present your arguments that I have a problem with. Like when you say we have the worst o line in the NFL. When we have added 2 free agents and a draft pick it's not possible to say that till we see them play. Or when you say Albert is a bust. That's not a fact at this time. Like I said most players take 3 years to know what you get. This will be Alberts 3rd season. All I am saying is that You just can't give up on a young guy just because they are not pro bowlers there first few seasons. Sure some guys are but that's not the case with all guys that turn out to be great players.

I am not one to accept just being Ok. Fact is I want to win the superbowl this year. But you also have to no that a entire new management team in the GM and Head coach that took over a 2-14 football team is not going to make a superbowl team overnight. This is the start of the 2nd season. All i am saying is that it's still to early to throw in the towel on this team or this management.

Saying a player is a bust or not a bust is based on the same thing. Your perception of them. Same with a team. If you think that Chiefs are on the right path or the wrong path, it's based on your perception. People who have absolutely no opinions on the Chiefs players, their GM, or their outlook probably aren't posting on this board.

The average NFL player is out of the league in three years. I think you're being generous in your timetable.

Albert has been a bust his first two years as a LT. I do not think this is debateable. He has been a bottom five LT from the time we drafted him. Will he be able to redeem himself? I don't know. I don't think so. I think his skill set is better served as a RT or RG. Feel free to disagree. And moving him to the right side or to guard isn't "giving up on him." It's putting him in the spot best for his talents.

And if the GM thinks that Albert has the stuff to be a top LT, that's fine. But don't enter the season without a legit backup if you have a project starting. For that matter, just imagine if Albert, poor as he's played so far, gets hurt. That's the fact everyone forgets about 2009 - we stayed healthy. We didn't lose ay starter (to my memory) for any significant period to injury. Do you realize how lucky we were? And if we're not that lucky in 2010, what does that mean?

Your mistake is that you think I'm talking about anything other than how I perceived the last two offseasons. I think they were bad offseasons for us. That's not the same as giving up on this year or on this team. Like you, I'm guessing how things will go based on how they've gone. I don't think our team can win games without a real NT, RT, ILBs, or SS. Do you?

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 06:33 PM

That might happen in KC we don't no yet. But you said they were stubbornly sticking to the plan at the expense of wins. When that at this time is not the case.

Correct. I was making a prediction about the future.

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 06:36 PM

Are you saying that Cincy, Arizona Atl, and NE turned it all around in a year or two? Last I checked, those teams had years upon years of being sh!t teams. they didnt change overnight.

Yeah, they changed over a year or two. Look at New England pre-Belicheck v. post-Belicheck. Arizona pre-Whisenhunt v. post-Whisenhunt. ATL pre-Dimitroff v. post-Dimitroff. The GM/HC overturned the roster, implemented new schemes, and started winning games. We implemented the new schemes (good riddance Cover 2 and pistol offense), but we haven't overturned the roster. Which is doubly bad because now we have a bunch of players playing out of position.

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 06:38 PM

so we are supposed to scrap the system that we have had in place for one year, the same system that the players have spent that year learning, the same system that Weiss and Crennel were brought in to run? That is how we build a winner?

Exact opposite. We should be scrapping many of the players, not the schemes they play.

Ryfo18

08-11-2010, 06:43 PM

I'm about to beat everyone's ***. I Internet power bomb you all. Because I'm RyFo, toughest SOB on CC.

Canada

08-11-2010, 07:09 PM

Yeah, they changed over a year or two. Look at New England pre-Belicheck v. post-Belicheck. Arizona pre-Whisenhunt v. post-Whisenhunt. ATL pre-Dimitroff v. post-Dimitroff. The GM/HC overturned the roster, implemented new schemes, and started winning games. We implemented the new schemes (good riddance Cover 2 and pistol offense), but we haven't overturned the roster. Which is doubly bad because now we have a bunch of players playing out of position.

That does not look like an overnight turnaround to me. Looks like they went through quite a few coaches to get the right guy.

Arizona

Had 5 seasons with more than 8 wins since 1970. Hardly an overnight turnaround.

Atlanta...has turned into some sort of powerhouse recently?

The point is that none of these teams turned around overnight. It took time. Some of them took a lot of time. I don't know how you think things should be done, all i have ever heard from you is that things are being done wrong.

Canada

08-11-2010, 07:11 PM

Exact opposite. We should be scrapping many of the players, not the schemes they play.

And who were we replacing them with?

Drunker Hillbilly

08-11-2010, 07:55 PM

I agree this thread has gotten very ugly, honestly if Matt becomes top 15 I will be happy, but I don't see that happening any time soon.
So if he's not top 15 we don't have a chance at the playoffs huh? Have you seen the division opponents? I'm guessing Trent Dilfer would disagree!

That does not look like an overnight turnaround to me. Looks like they went through quite a few coaches to get the right guy.

Arizona

Had 5 seasons with more than 8 wins since 1970. Hardly an overnight turnaround.

Atlanta...has turned into some sort of powerhouse recently?

The point is that none of these teams turned around overnight. It took time. Some of them took a lot of time. I don't know how you think things should be done, all i have ever heard from you is that things are being done wrong.

Your post doesn't make sense. Almost every team has existed for decades, including the Chiefs. They all have high points and low points. Belicheck took over at a low point and turned it into high point through good player selection and good schemes. Same with the others I mentioned.

When Pioli took over the Chiefs, it was at a low point. His job is to turn it to a high point. Other guys have done that in a year or two. It doesn't take a decade or more.

figcrostic

08-11-2010, 08:18 PM

So if he's not top 15 we don't have a chance at the playoffs huh? Have you seen the division opponents? I'm guessing Trent Dilfer would disagree!

I didn't say that, the poster I was replying to said Cassel will be top ten, I would be happy with top 15 which is just above average.

Canada

08-11-2010, 08:19 PM

Your post doesn't make sense. Almost every team has existed for decades, including the Chiefs. They all have high points and low points. Belicheck took over at a low point and turned it into high point through good player selection and good schemes. Same with the others I mentioned.

When Pioli took over the Chiefs, it was at a low point. His job is to turn it to a high point. Other guys have done that in a year or two. It doesn't take a decade or more.

Yeah, the low points for the teams you mentioned we very long periods of time before the right guy came along. By your logic, every team has an overnight turnaround when the truth of the matter is that it takes time.

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 08:30 PM

And who were we replacing them with?

*shrug* It's easy and pointless (though fun) to redo drafts and free agency. I listed earlier how I thought out 2010 draft should have gone. I'd also have gone after tough, serviceable vets like Henderson hard this offseason.

This first step is to admit there's a problem. Would you agree with me that we need a new C, RT (moving Albert would solve this, but would make LT the priority), NT, LILB, RILB, LOLB, and SS very, very badly? Would you agree that we may need to upgrade/replace our QB, 1WR, 2CB, and LG next season? And would you agree that we have unproven or questionable players at RG, TE, FS, 3WR, RDE, and LDE?

If you don't agree with me about the above classifications, I understand why you're happy with what we've got. Now, if you agree with me that we need to fix these spots, then the question becomes "Why haven't we in two offseasons?" Because these are the sames holes we've had since 2007.

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 08:35 PM

Yeah, the low points for the teams you mentioned we very long periods of time before the right guy came along. By your logic, every team has an overnight turnaround when the truth of the matter is that it takes time.

Well, yeah. The teams I mentioned (and they were the recent ones in my memory) were bad for a long time. They got new leadership, instituted new players and re-did the roster, and were contending again in a year or two. We could do/could have done the same. Who disagrees with this?

EDIT: "instituted new schemes and re-did the roster"

Canada

08-11-2010, 08:43 PM

*shrug* It's easy and pointless (though fun) to redo drafts and free agency. I listed earlier how I thought out 2010 draft should have gone. I'd also have gone after tough, serviceable vets like Henderson hard this offseason.

This first step is to admit there's a problem. Would you agree with me that we need a new C, RT (moving Albert would solve this, but would make LT the priority), NT, LILB, RILB, LOLB, and SS very, very badly? Would you agree that we may need to upgrade/replace our QB, 1WR, 2CB, and LG next season? And would you agree that we have unproven or questionable players at RG, TE, FS, 3WR, RDE, and LDE?

If you don't agree with me about the above classifications, I understand why you're happy with what we've got. Now, if you agree with me that we need to fix these spots, then the question becomes "Why haven't we in two offseasons?" Because these are the sames holes we've had since 2007.

We have addressed several needs in the last two drafts. do I agree that we need to upgrade the O and D lines...sure. Do I think they can't win games? NO. Does having some speed in the backfield improve the O line...sure. we have two top 5 picks on the D line, maybe a good defensive coach can improve their play to the level it should be at. I think our secondary is pretty good. We went from a fat slow team two years ago to a team with speed. I think Bowe and Chambers, along with McCluster could make a damn good group of receivers. Hopefully Moeaki turns out to be a good TE. Bottom line is, there is always room to upgrade at a position. And no, the jury is still our on Cassel. Im not looking to replace him now.

So could the guys on this team win 8 games? Yes, I think they can. We still get to draft next year and address some of the issues you have brought up, but I dont think the guys we have now are as bad as you make them out to be. We win 8 games this year and then get a good run stuffing NT in teh next draft (as opposed to the fat average NT we could have gotten this year) There is more that one way to build a winner and just because they aren't following your way, does not mean they are doing it wrong.

Canada

08-11-2010, 08:46 PM

Well, yeah. The teams I mentioned (and they were the recent ones in my memory) were bad for a long time. They got new leadership, instituted new players and re-did the roster, and were contending again in a year or two. We could do/could have done the same. Who disagrees with this?

EDIT: "instituted new schemes and re-did the roster"

How do you know that we haven't?

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 08:52 PM

We have addressed several needs in the last two drafts. do I agree that we need to upgrade the O and D lines...sure. Do I think they can't win games? NO. Does having some speed in the backfield improve the O line...sure. we have two top 5 picks on the D line, maybe a good defensive coach can improve their play to the level it should be at. I think our secondary is pretty good. We went from a fat slow team two years ago to a team with speed. I think Bowe and Chambers, along with McCluster could make a damn good group of receivers. Hopefully Moeaki turns out to be a good TE. Bottom line is, there is always room to upgrade at a position. And no, the jury is still our on Cassel. Im not looking to replace him now.

So could the guys on this team win 8 games? Yes, I think they can. We still get to draft next year and address some of the issues you have brought up, but I dont think the guys we have now are as bad as you make them out to be. We win 8 games this year and then get a good run stuffing NT in teh next draft (as opposed to the fat average NT we could have gotten this year) There is more that one way to build a winner and just because they aren't following your way, does not mean they are doing it wrong.

There are several ways to build a winner. But you can't build a winner without a good-to-great QB, OL, and front seven. And we don't have those. And I couldn't tell from your response. Do you agree with me that O'Callghan, Niswanger, Edwards, Mays, and Williams need to replaced?

I'd feel a lot better about our two top-5 DL if Dorsey were playing at his natural position and TJ didn't look so be awful last year. As an aside, the thing that bugs me most about our defense is that we right now have the perfect personnel for a 4-3 defense (Hali/Dorsey/Edwards/Jackson up front, and DJ/Williams/Vrabel at LB) but we're playing Dorsey, Edwards, and DJ out of position.

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 08:57 PM

How do you know that we haven't?

So, do you agree that it can be done or not?

matthews and I were talking about our attitudes towards the Chiefs in 2011 if we did badly in 2010. Looking at what I perceive to be big gaps in our roster, I don't think we've acquired the players to be considered to be in a turnaround yet.

Pro_Angler

08-11-2010, 09:16 PM

bwilliams..I think that players you get in the draft doesnt necessaraly mean that youve turned around. Those players still need to prove them selves as well as the coaches.
To call a team turned around they must produce so at the end of the 2010 or maybe 3/4 through it we may be concidered as turned around.
I still believe IMO that we are turning the corner on the final lap and will soon be hitting the home stretch.

fairladyZ

08-11-2010, 09:17 PM

It's simple.. Cassel has already proved he can win with the pieces around him and actually be a very good QB. He took the 08 patriots to a better record than the brady led 09 patriots.

My only complaint about cassel is he does hold the ball to long sometimes and doesn't just get rid of it. Only knock i have on him

bwilliams

08-11-2010, 09:31 PM

bwilliams..I think that players you get in the draft doesnt necessaraly mean that youve turned around. Those players still need to prove them selves as well as the coaches.
To call a team turned around they must produce so at the end of the 2010 or maybe 3/4 through it we may be concidered as turned around.
I still believe IMO that we are turning the corner on the final lap and will soon be hitting the home stretch.

Very true. As I wrote above, I'm just writing it like I think it'll be. And the way I see it, we have more than a dozen holes on this roster that our GM refuses to exist or correct, and I don't think we'll win games until we do correct them.

Connie Jo

08-11-2010, 10:00 PM

Very nice I didn't see that one on here.

It's not on here, it's one in my collection of gif images. I'm a huge Clint Eastwood fan. :)

Canada

08-11-2010, 10:04 PM

There are several ways to build a winner. But you can't build a winner without a good-to-great QB, OL, and front seven. And we don't have those. And I couldn't tell from your response. Do you agree with me that O'Callghan, Niswanger, Edwards, Mays, and Williams need to replaced?

Do I think there are better options out there? Sure. However I think they can do an adequate job this season. I think that some of our positions of need were overlooked this draft in favor of better options in next years draft. The best example I have of this is our NT. There was no defense changing NT out there this year so I think they slapped a band aid on it for the year and will address it next season.

I'd feel a lot better about our two top-5 DL if Dorsey were playing at his natural position and TJ didn't look so be awful last year. As an aside, the thing that bugs me most about our defense is that we right now have the perfect personnel for a 4-3 defense (Hali/Dorsey/Edwards/Jackson up front, and DJ/Williams/Vrabel at LB) but we're playing Dorsey, Edwards, and DJ out of position.

We were a team that won 2 games. We brought in a new HC and GM (late) and expected miracles last year. Im not discounting what they did last year. Mistakes were made but with the coaching aquisitions made this year show me that these guys are making a comitment to winning. Is it the right path to a SuperBowl...no one knows yet. But Im not about to throw them all under the bus after one season and 2 drafts. Could we step on the field in the 2011 season and be a SuperBowl contender? Sure...that would be a pretty good turn around if u ask me!!

Connie Jo

08-11-2010, 10:29 PM

I'm about to beat everyone's ***. I Internet power bomb you all. Because I'm RyFo, toughest SOB on CC.

Oh yeah? I think I can take ya!

http://www.chiefscrowd.com/forums/images/imported/2010/08/23.jpg

http://www.chiefscrowd.com/forums/images/imported/2010/08/24.jpg

http://www.chiefscrowd.com/forums/images/imported/2010/08/25.jpg

:lol:

Pro_Angler

08-11-2010, 11:56 PM

Very true. As I wrote above, I'm just writing it like I think it'll be. And the way I see it, we have more than a dozen holes on this roster that our GM refuses to exist or correct, and I don't think we'll win games until we do correct them.

Maybe the holes arent as big as "we: see them as. I am sure that the holes as we call them are mearly spots that require more mentoring and reps? I think even in the "holes" spots we have good people that just need more game time and the right coaching.. The coaching has been addressed and the other will come in time....hopefully not a long time..

bwilliams

08-12-2010, 10:32 AM

Maybe the holes arent as big as "we: see them as. I am sure that the holes as we call them are mearly spots that require more mentoring and reps? I think even in the "holes" spots we have good people that just need more game time and the right coaching.. The coaching has been addressed and the other will come in time....hopefully not a long time..

Sure, it's possible. Maybe I'm completely wrong and guys like Edwards, O'Callghan, Mays, and Williams just need time and reps in a new scheme. I'd love to be completely wrong. I've been right about things for the past three years, and being right makes me miserable. I'd much rather be wrong and happy.

Anyway, we'll find out pretty soon. I think the Chargers game is going to tell us a lot about a lot.

Pro_Angler

08-12-2010, 10:40 AM

Im not as worried about the chargers game as I am about the week after against the browns, short week coming off a emotianal hard faught first game..

Drunker Hillbilly

08-12-2010, 10:47 AM

Regardless of the rookie's and new aquisitions, I think it will be evident by week 5 whether or not we have taken a step forward or if we are the same team from last season

I do think the defense will be improved but I really think the whole season revolves around the offensive line. I know they showed some improvement towards the end of last season but it's a new year which means they could go either way IMO. If the O line is better, this team is better.

figcrostic

08-12-2010, 10:47 AM

Im not as worried about the chargers game as I am about the week after against the browns, short week coming off a emotianal hard faught first game..

That's gotta feel weird to say considering the Browns history.

figcrostic

08-12-2010, 10:53 AM

Regardless of the rookie's and new aquisitions, I think it will be evident by week 5 whether or not we have taken a step forward or if we are the same team from last season

I do think the defense will be improved but I really think the whole season revolves around the offensive line. I know they showed some improvement towards the end of last season but it's a new year which means they could go either way IMO. If the O line is better, this team is better.

The O-line needs help from their QB and his ability to actually get rid of the ball. We can't allow 40+ sacks this year. I understand wanting to make a play, and I understand not wanting to throw an int, but sometimes you just gotta throw the damn ball.

Pro_Angler

08-12-2010, 01:27 PM

That's gotta feel weird to say considering the Browns history.

Not at all fig..The browns tend to show up for games and if we are spent emotionally on a short week that automatic W we put in front of the game alrteady could be in jeaperdy..Thats all i am saying..

Connie Jo

08-12-2010, 05:38 PM

Not at all fig..The browns tend to show up for games and if we are spent emotionally on a short week that automatic W we put in front of the game alrteady could be in jeaperdy..Thats all i am saying..

I agree.

The Browns may not have a great record, but they have been known often as the underdog to upset a better team, including our Chiefs, and more than once! I've learned never to under-estimate the Browns, especially against our Chiefs.

stricken721

08-12-2010, 06:30 PM

I agree.

The Browns may not have a great record, but they have been known often as the underdog to upset a better team, including our Chiefs, and more than once! I've learned never to under-estimate the Browns, especially against our Chiefs.

Last years game against the Browns hurt a little bit.. Chiefs played so well but just couldn't get it done in the end.

Chief Tyler

08-13-2010, 06:11 PM

Last years game against the Browns hurt a little bit.. Chiefs played so well but just couldn't get it done in the end.

We deserved to lose that game. 350 rushing yards to a team as bad as the Browns is unacceptable.

Connie Jo

08-16-2010, 12:48 AM

I attended the Browns game last season...it was by far the most miserable and upsetting game I've ever attended at Arrowhead. Not just because the Chiefs lost, but for many various justified reasons. I hope I never experience again what I did that game, including disrespectful behavior by Chiefs fans...as well as many Chiefs players appearing not to care if they won or lost. :(

Austin Avalon

08-16-2010, 02:04 AM

I always seem to remember the Chiefs having a hard time with the Browns. I remember when the Browns had Testeverde the Browns always seemed to win.